My brief mention of the copyright article in the International Herald Tribune prompted m'learned friend C.E. Petit, Esq., to point out that he has trashed the article pretty thoroughly on his blog.
If you haven't already made the acquaintance of the Scrivener's Error blog, you should do so forthwith. Lots of good stuff there, particularly on the continuing Google saga and other related copyright matters.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Scrivener's Error is correct in his negative view of the International Herald Tribune article. As Petit suggests, where do the "generous range of subsidies and other stimulating measures" come from and who distributes them. Notice how the article still calls for a "one-year usufruct" (copyright?) for some artists. It has to be remembered that copyright also performs other useful functions such as helping to identify authors and artists.
Could I suggest another alternative; analyse how creative works derive from many contributions, look at the way the digital world influences these contributions and the distribution models, and then bring copyright up-to-date so that so that the whole of society can benefit.
Post a Comment