There are many books that are published with worthwhile information but a very limited audience. They go out of print because they have limited appeal. If a book becomes unavailable because it is out of print but is desirable for a limited audience, the author and publisher would lose negligible recompense if the book was copied to a very limited extent to satisfy a few experts or a very small audience. Why not have a provision for permitting copying legally for at least the time the book is not available for a small audience. If the book comes into large enough demand to permit financial recompense sufficient to make reissue by the publisher rewarding, the copyright could be re-instated.
I agree
No opinion
I disagree
Add your comment
Though I approve of the direction of your proposal, I think it is not as practical as Larry Lessig's http://www.lessig.org/ concept of Required Registration. The idea is, as I see it, that instead of automatically beeing copyright (after a few years), the owner would have to register to have the protection continued. The advantage is: 1) Most works are not valuable enough to pay even a minimum fee so would revert to the Public Domain. 2) The works that the owners wanted to continue would be registered so that a person who wanted to use it could find the owner.
This allows the owners to determine if they want to continue to protect their work, at a minimum cost, for a period.
The problem I see with your proposal is it: 1) Does not help to determine who holds the copyright. 2) Has the uncertaincy that if a work is off copyright, and a thrid party wants to do something with it, then the work can be pulled back, thus making it difficult to do business on un-copyright material.
Of course I may not understand your proposal, and support any proposal that would free up content that it is better to be returned to the Commons.
Thanks...
In addition to requiring registration, why not have the cost of registration increase each year? This would help push unprofitable works into the public domain.
Measter, that is possibly the worst thing I have ever heard in my life. If you charge for copywrights than only the rich can have them. Since the rich have money they can buy all of the knowledge. Things are supposed to become public domain, all things. It dosen't matter how much money you have your information will go public domain too. What you are suggesting has kind of been implemented by Disney bribing judges. There should be a rule that says 7 years of copywirght than public domain, no ifs ands or buts. This was used in the begining of the United States. Copywright should be used ONLY to promote meaningful arts and sciences, not so disney can score a few mil more. Lessigs has some good ideas about weakening IP law but charging money would be a blow to education.
I avoid paying full retail prices for books I want by buying them used, often through Amazon.com or eBay. I've bought many books in excellent condition for a fraction of retail price. In those rare instances when I can't find what I want used, it doesn't sting so much to pay the full retail price (I still shop around for best prices, though).
Tightwad, and proud of it. Profit is not a bad thing, it's why most of us have jobs. Fortunately, I don't have to like it.
Companies regularly do business and copyright things like memos, email, and other bits of information that might damage the company if the information was allowed to be reprinted. Asking companies to pay fees for every piece of paper that they copyright is neither practical, nor desireable. Actually, I would rather see a system developed where ALL copyrighted information is tracked and search engines comb the internet looking for violations and reporting them to the original authors. This way an author of an idea at least has the opportunity to get something for their insight. Companies could be set up to represent the authors and would make their money by searching for violations and representing authors. Something like eBay, WhyNot, and Patent Attornies combined.