From: spok+@cs.cmu.edu (John Ockerbloom)
Newsgroups: alt.journalism,alt.wired,comp.org.eff.talk,alt.culture.internet,
            alt.etext,misc.int-property,rec.arts.misc,rec.arts.books,misc.writing
Subject: But what about Public Domain? (Re: Cyberspace Gold Rush and Copyright)
Date: 14 Mar 1995 17:19:39 GMT


In article <nwuD5E4Kn.A61@netcom.com>, National Writers Union
<nwu-info@netcom.com, irvmuch@netcom.com> wrote:

> New York Times Magazine columnist Max Frankel quotes 
> lyricist Hal David as fearing "creators" will become road 
> kill on the information superhighway. Frankel calls for an 
> ethic of "no pay, no say" in the brave new digital world.

I agree that the creators of artistic works deserve fair compensation
for their work for a reasonable period of time after creation.  (Currently
in the US, that's 75 years after publication for older works, and 50 years
after the author's death for newer works.)

But if "no pay, no say" is taken as an absolute value, the Net will
be impoverished, and the Net will split between the "information rich"
that can afford to pay for information they want, and the "information poor"
that can't.

That's one reason why the public domain exists.  Creators get rights
to control distribution and profit from their work for a limited time,
and then their work passes into the public domain, allowing anyone
access to it free of charge.  With the growth of the Internet, public
domain works can be distributed more widely and cheaply than ever
before, and documents from our cultural heritage can be preserved and
freely studied on-line.

New proposed US legislation, though, would freeze the public domain, and
prevent any copyrights from expiring for the next 20 years.  This comes
after an *earlier* extension of copyright by 19 years in 1976-- 19 years ago.
And some agencies for the motion picture and music industry have said they
would favor extending copyright even *further*-- to 125 years, or even
in perpetuity.  Basically, little by little, the growth of the public
domain is being choked off altogether.

(See rec.arts.books and bit.listserv.gutnberg for
 more detailed discussion of these bills.)

>But the Constitution mandates a copyright system to promote 
>"the progress of science and useful arts." Such a system 
>needs a shelf life longer than that of a floppy disk.

Agreed.  But not longer than that of the pyramids.  And not much
longer than that of the author.

Is the NWU willing to support both the right of authors to get
compensation for new works, and the right of the public to
have free access to older works, after a reasonable time period?

John Ockerbloom
Maintainer, The On-Line Books Page (http://www.cs.cmu.edu:8001/Web/books.html)

-- 
==========================================================================
ockerbloom@cs.cmu.edu            1603 Beechwood Blvd., Pittsburgh PA 15217