Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Submission + - An argument for the "Fourteen Year" Copyri

westlake writes: "Cambridge PhD candidate Rufus Pollack — no stranger to this particular controversy — makes an economic and social argument for an "optimal" limit to copyright of fourteen years. As Ars Technica describes it, "Pollock's work is based on the promise that the optimal level of copyright drops as the costs of producing creative work go down. As it has grown simpler to print books, record music, and edit films using digital tools, the production and reproduction costs for creative work have dropped substantially. An optimal copyright term of 14 years [balances] the incentive to create new work and the social welfare that comes from having work enter the public domain (where it often inspires new creative acts)" Conspicuously absent is any distinction between the "analog" artist and the new "digital" enterprise. Harry Potter remains J.K. Rowling's creation, not Time-Warner's. What the public domain most often inspires in the producer is the safe, profitable, 100th re-make of The Three Musketeers — he won't gamble on an original story unless he must."
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

An argument for the "Fourteen Year" Copyri

Comments Filter:

With all the fancy scientists in the world, why can't they just once build a nuclear balm?