News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Copyright doesn't need 95 years to get the job done by bediger4000 on Monday January 03, 2022 @06:08PM (#29788381)
Honestly, I don't see the problem with a 20 year copyright term.

You made profits off the prints for 20 years, and the state enforced those rights. You didn't pay for them, at most you paid a token fee to register the copyrights.

That's the bargain of copyright, I think. Yes, some folks lose control after a period, but everyone else is enriched.

Excuse me, I've got to go order a Miskatonic University sweatshirt.

Re:Copyright doesn't need 95 years to get the job done by Sebb767 on Monday January 03, 2022 @08:24PM (#29789855)
> You made profits off the prints for 20 years, and the state enforced those rights. You didn't pay for them, at most you paid a token fee to register the copyrights.

That's a very idealized version. You most likely did pay taxes on any income made and you payed a lawyer to enforce your right, if necessary. The only thing the state did was to write those laws down once and offer a judge and jury, in case of a violation.

Also, you didn't pay for any of your other rights. I don't see why copyright should be special in that regard.

I'm fine with 20 years, but that argument in particular is rather weak.

Re:Copyright doesn't need 95 years to get the job done by MagnumOpus on Tuesday January 04, 2022 @11:42AM (#29796770)
> The only thing the state did was to write those laws down once and offer a judge and jury, in case of a violation.

Nope. The judge and jury are backed by the bailiff who forecloses on you if you don't pay the judgement, and by the police who jails you if you resist the taking of your assets, and by the prison system where you end up. This whole security apparatus is behind just "writing those laws", and it does not come cheap.