Wapsi Square Forum

Ah, copyright.

So one day, a person wanted to publish the ink blots from the famous psychiatric test developed by Dr. VonShmear back in the day, but was given a cease-and-desist.

Result? Tracings of the blots were NON copyrighted (transformative work) with instructions to avoid coloring them in with black to avoid copyright violation.

Ha!

Copyright - Implicit copyright has only existed since the 1976 Mickey Mouse act, and was extended back 25 years. Explicit copyright was the rule up until then. So anything made before 1952, if it did not expressly say "copyright X", the copyright has ended.

I'm a firm believer that copyright should be returned back to what it was originally - 17 years, just like patents - and then move to the public domain. Almost every single group that claims they must keep control of their 'characters' is fully of garbage. They hold _trademark_, which never expires, and can't be sold, only given.

So, for example, a long running cartoon like Blondie and Dagwood would have all the old strips expired from copyright. All that means is that someone could copy them and sell a 'the first 30 years of Blondie' compilation. They could NOT use the characters elsewhere, alter the original comics, or anything like that - it would violate the trademark on the characters.

Dunno.

The Sonny Bono Act is later than that, and it changed some things.

And when the US signed onto the Berne Convention, in the late 80s/early 90s, a lot of copyright rules changed.

For instance, most if not all of Kipling came back into copyright until 2011, and H G Wells is STILL in copyright until 2021.

Not sure how that that affected implicit copyright.

And as the brother of a best-selling author, I disagree with your position.

If i build an office block, I {and my heirs} can continue collecting rent on it as long as it stands.

Why should an author, who creates something that is, arguably, of more ultimate benefit to society be denied the same right?

The copyright laws, as they stand now, are a disservice to the public. The most egregious examples are from the music industry, where people will go insane with lawyers over a back beat! "Variations on a theme" are, bluntly, illegal for anything composed in the last eighty years thanks to corporations, lawyers, and politicians!

Read Spider Robinson's "Melancholy Elephants" for a good base.

The original copyright laws were written in the US Constitution. Yes, that far back.

U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Clause 8, Section 8. AKA the Intellectual Property Clause.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/intelle ... rty_clause

This was set to allow creators of works, specifically written ones (plays, books, poetry, etc), to be properly protected so they could adequately be remunerated for their work. (also inventors of goods, aka patents) The initial time for patents and copyrights was 17 years. _Seventeen years_. That was at a time where it took up to three months to cross the Atlantic. That meant that they figured that someone would be adequately compensated for their work in that period of time, where the fastest cargo transportation was boat, barge, and wagon. It was NOT so that greedy children, grandchildren, great-great-great grandchildren, and corporations could continue to milk the work of others for generations to come! Heck, I could even see 'life of the author, or 25 years, whichever is greater', possibly. But not this 'forever and a day' we're doing now. _Corporations_ now get to hold copyrights! They don't die! The works were then supposed to be released to the public domain for the public good.

Before someone jumps on the 'then someone else profits from their characters!' bullshit, let me point something out. Trademarks do _not_ expire. They can be passed down, generation to generation. They can be passed along to corporations, individuals, and partnerships. Thus, Disney pushing for the extension of copyright wasn't because they were afraid of someone stealing Mickey Mouse (Steamboat Willie). It was because they didn't want someone that had an old print of it copying it and reselling it. No-one would be allowed to create _new_ Mickey Mouse (Steamboat Willie) movies - that would violate their trademark. It was a pure greed move that makes no sense from a public good standpoint.

I'm sorry if you think you can't make enough money off of your works to provide for your family in your lifetime, but perhaps that's a problem with your works? I don't expect people to keep paying me for my computer services long after I'm dead, even if I do something for them that they continue to use for another 20 years.

Here's a document (no clue who wrote it other than the name on it. Could be a freshman English major, but it has information on other works as well) that gives a breakdown on some of it as well.

https://www1.udel.edu/edtech/gallery/ex ... -Good.docx

Edit - As for the office building comparison? It doesn't wash. An office building isn't a once and done thing like a book. It requires constant work until it's torn down. A better comparison would be why should you get paid rent for an office building after you've sold it to someone else.

Never mind.

I can see that we are on opposite sides of this and neither of us will convince the other.

Current copyright, BTW, is creator's life plus seventy-five years.

Trademark expires, but can be regularly renewed with no limitation.

AnotherFairportfan wrote: ↑Thu Nov 29, 2018 10:12 am Never mind.

I can see that we are on opposite sides of this and neither of us will convince the other.

Current copyright, BTW, is creator's life plus seventy-five years.

Trademark expires, but can be regularly renewed with no limitation.

Yes - and the creator, nowadays, can be defined as a corporation.

Again - trademark is where the money lies. Copyright is where the lawsuits go.

Only if you are talking about things like fms and comics.

Music and literature, copyright is key.

AnotherFairportfan wrote: ↑Thu Nov 29, 2018 8:02 pm Only if you are talking about things like fms and comics.

Music and literature, copyright is key.

Music, somewhat. Literature, the money is in the licensing. Harry Potter and all of those characters are considered trademarks. All of the Lord of the Rings movies were based on trademark. Otherwise, they could be argued to be a totally different medium, and thus not subject to copyright. Believe me, the Tolkien estate has fought diligently to protect their trademarks.

And now, for something completely different:

Batman smells: a rebuttal

lake_wrangler wrote: ↑Fri Nov 30, 2018 11:47 am And now, for something completely different:

Batman smells: a rebuttal

There's something mildly wrong with that one. Surprised that DC hasn't gone after the author.

Besides, everyone knows that Batman smells. It's from all of those Super Bat Smoke and Tear Gas Grenades he carries.

AnotherFairportfan wrote: ↑Thu Nov 29, 2018 10:12 am Never mind.

I can see that we are on opposite sides of this and neither of us will convince the other.

Current copyright, BTW, is creator's life plus seventy-five years.

Trademark expires, but can be regularly renewed with no limitation.

I do think one downside is that useful works of limited commercial value don't lapse into public domain for 100 years, so they may effectively be lost. I mean the kind of stuff that is reprinted by Dover.

Not arguing with you. I get paid to enforce submission of copyright transfers on research articles.

Bookworm wrote: ↑Mon Nov 26, 2018 10:17 pm Honestly, there's no dodgy engineering in them. They're one of the simplest 'complex machines' you can build. Cheap components? Absolutely. I tend to buy the cheap ones, and replace every 5 years or so. Maybe a bit more. Mostly because a seal rebuild kit would cost more than the jack.

The one I had I'd salvaged off of an old military vehicle that was being stripped to be used as a target. I'm not even sure what country produced it. But it worked perfectly fine for me for almost two decades, and I was hoping to find one similar. All the ones I've seen, though, seem to have all sorts of complaints about them messing up after only a short time. Maybe I'll just build an antigravity car and not have to worry about jacks.

Catawampus wrote: ↑Wed Dec 05, 2018 7:35 pm

Bookworm wrote: ↑Mon Nov 26, 2018 10:17 pm Honestly, there's no dodgy engineering in them. They're one of the simplest 'complex machines' you can build. Cheap components? Absolutely. I tend to buy the cheap ones, and replace every 5 years or so. Maybe a bit more. Mostly because a seal rebuild kit would cost more than the jack.

The one I had I'd salvaged off of an old military vehicle that was being stripped to be used as a target. I'm not even sure what country produced it. But it worked perfectly fine for me for almost two decades, and I was hoping to find one similar. All the ones I've seen, though, seem to have all sorts of complaints about them messing up after only a short time. Maybe I'll just build an antigravity car and not have to worry about jacks.

Want a cheap one to last? Buy one that you can order a seal rebuild kit. I have a cheap one that I bought a decade ago. Other than losing a wheel nut, it's fine, except that it needs the seals replaced. So you can jack it up, but then it starts to fall slowly.

I just decided it wasn't cost effective for me to try to hunt down the fiddly parts for my needs. I don't use it daily, I use it maybe once a month, usually.

Here's something that is somewhat amusing:

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Daleks

As I was heading to my car to leave for work, I saw that a bird had flown into the driver's window, hitting it hard enough to kill itself, leaving a couple small feathers stuck to the glass.

So far, nothing bad has happened tonight, so maybe it wasn't a sign of anything bad would happen.

Alkarii wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 10:09 pm As I was heading to my car to leave for work, I saw that a bird had flown into the driver's window, hitting it hard enough to kill itself, leaving a couple small feathers stuck to the glass.

So far, nothing bad has happened tonight, so maybe it wasn't a sign of anything bad would happen.

No, no. It was definitely a bad sign. For the bird. Most people seem to forget that, and try to assign obvious emotional traits to inanimate objects.

Alkarii wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 10:09 pm So far, nothing bad has happened tonight, so maybe it wasn't a sign of anything bad would happen.

Depends a lot on what kind of bird it was.

If it was something like a sparrow, it wouldn't mean anything about your future.

On the other hand, if was an omen pigeon...

Dave wrote: ↑Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:05 am

Alkarii wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 10:09 pm So far, nothing bad has happened tonight, so maybe it wasn't a sign of anything bad would happen.

Depends a lot on what kind of bird it was.

If it was something like a sparrow, it wouldn't mean anything about your future.

On the other hand, if was an omen pigeon...

Then that means that the pigeon made it 'ome?

jwhouk wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 2:17 pm Chocolate Spill closes road in Germany

Worst dessert-related man-made disaster since the Boston Molasses Flood of 1919.