• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How long should a copyright last before it becomes public domain?

How long should a copyright last before the I.P. becomes public domain?

  • There should be no such thing as a copyright.

    Votes: 4 7.8%

  • 1-20 years after intellectual property is created

    Votes: 15 29.4%

  • 21-40 years after intellectual property is created

    Votes: 2 3.9%

  • 41-60 years after intellectual property is created

    Votes: 1 2.0%

  • The copyright should last as long as the creator of the intellectual property is still alive

    Votes: 4 7.8%

  • 1-20 after the original creator of the intellectual property has died

    Votes: 5 9.8%

  • 21-40 after the original creator of the intellectual property has died

    Votes: 3 5.9%

  • 41-60 after the original creator of the intellectual property has died

    Votes: 3 5.9%

  • The copyright on the intellectual property should last forever (a perpetual copyright.)

    Votes: 3 5.9%

  • other idea or I do not know(please specify)

    Votes: 11 21.6%
  • Total voters
    51
5 years with the option to renew for up to 50 years in 5 year increments. Also, no royalties to be paid for non-commercial use (like at weddings, musical background on personal videos, etc.)
 
evanescence said:
This is my opinion exactly. Except ten years seems more reasonable.
Click to expand...

I said less than 20 years, responding to Harry. 10-15 years might be a good limit.
 
DiAnna said:
Just a point of information here. I am unaware of any publishers that have tried to stop libraries from carrying books, although there may have been an obscure case here or there.
Click to expand...

Happened once with the Harry Potter series. There wasn't any legal action, but the publisher did attempt to ask some libraries not to stock the book for a period of time after its release-- the response was less than positive and the matter was dropped. I actually have no problem with asking libraries to wait before lending out books expected to sell massively, but that takes us back to the point we're talking about: libraries and used booksellers allow people to read anything they want without the authors seeing a dime of it, but people with library cards and who buy all of their books used aren't the targets of massive propaganda campaigns.
 
Viktyr Korimir said:
I would accept ten years as a time limit for non-commercial use. For commercial use, that's just not enough.
Click to expand...

It largely depends on the industry in question. If said industry invested larger sums of money in the process of creating their product, I can see extending IP for another five years give or take. I know the medical industry would qualify for more time.
 
If I spend 20 years inventing something why should I not expect to be rewarded for it through ownership of the intellectual property that I invented? How much is 20 years of a persons life worth? Royalties are compensation for work, it is not free money. And some corporations have spent millions or even billions developing a product why should someone have the right to just take all that investment away just because someone thinks there should be a time limit on that investment?

If I carve (Im a wood carver) a piece and do not sell it, and put it on display as my trademark piece, why should I ever have to give up my creation? It was me who designed and carved the piece, I figured out a complex 3d design, why cant I own that particular design forever? Why should someone else have the right to take my design for their own profit, when they did not do any of the design work? In my world I call that stealing.
 
Because knowledge is a public good and the entire purpose of copyright and intellectual property is to encourage the proliferation of knowledge.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
If I spend 20 years inventing something why should I not expect to be rewarded for it through ownership of the intellectual property that I invented? How much is 20 years of a persons life worth? Royalties are compensation for work, it is not free money. And some corporations have spent millions or even billions developing a product why should someone have the right to just take all that investment away just because someone thinks there should be a time limit on that investment? .
Click to expand...

Not just somebody - it has ALWAYS been that way in the U.S [and in other countries too], and for GOOD REASON IMO of course - nevermind that nothing is created in a vacumn, and that things are based off of others' works, inventions, ideas.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
If I spend 20 years inventing something why should I not expect to be rewarded for it through ownership of the intellectual property that I invented? How much is 20 years of a persons life worth? Royalties are compensation for work, it is not free money. And some corporations have spent millions or even billions developing a product why should someone have the right to just take all that investment away just because someone thinks there should be a time limit on that investment?

If I carve (Im a wood carver) a piece and do not sell it, and put it on display as my trademark piece, why should I ever have to give up my creation? It was me who designed and carved the piece, I figured out a complex 3d design, why cant I own that particular design forever? Why should someone else have the right to take my design for their own profit, when they did not do any of the design work? In my world I call that stealing.
Click to expand...

You have no "rights" to an idea whatsoever. The public has generously decided to restrict their own rights in order to give you a limited time monopoly as a financial incentive. You are like a person who holds an event at a public park and then claim you own it forever. Its laughably self entitled and utterly lacking in legal or moral basis.
 
It depends. If someone created a toy per se. Then that person should be allowed a copyright as long as that person lives. That being said. If someone writes a book then it should be their intellectual property to the end of time.
 
DashingAmerican said:
It depends. If someone created a toy per se. Then that person should be allowed a copyright as long as that person lives. That being said. If someone writes a book then it should be their intellectual property to the end of time.
Click to expand...

Why should one have greater rights to media IP rather than invention IP?
That doesn't make any sense.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Why should one have greater rights to media IP rather than invention IP?
That doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...
Maybe using toys was a bad example, but things such as weapons and medicine, etc should be allowed to be improved upon.
 
DashingAmerican said:
Maybe using toys was a bad example, but things such as weapons and medicine, etc should be allowed to be improved upon.
Click to expand...

Everything should fall into that category, not just medicine, weapons, etc.

What your really saying, whether you realize it or not, is that media IP is less valuable to society, so they deserve longer rights of ownership.
That too, makes no sense at all.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Everything should fall into that category, not just medicine, weapons, etc.

What your really saying, whether you realize it or not, is that media IP is less valuable to society, so they deserve longer rights of ownership.
That too, makes no sense at all.
Click to expand...

I don't really see it that way. You can judge if you improved upon a weapon or medicine. You can't judge whether or not you wrote a book better.
 
DashingAmerican said:
Ah, so you think you could write the Lord of the Rings better?
Click to expand...

Nope. Not in the slightest. On my very best day, my work is airport fantasy-- I aspire to airport fantasy. But I think better authors than myself could use Tolkien's worlds and his characters to create meaningful things, expand on his work the way that other authors have been allowed to expand upon the works of Howard and Lovecraft.
 
rathi said:
You have no "rights" to an idea whatsoever. The public has generously decided to restrict their own rights in order to give you a limited time monopoly as a financial incentive. You are like a person who holds an event at a public park and then claim you own it forever. Its laughably self entitled and utterly lacking in legal or moral basis.
Click to expand...

Lacking in both legal and moral? Then Ill just keep all my ideas to myself and not risk the vultures that are lying in wait for me to do all the work for them.

Let me get this straight, you assert that if I create my artwork that somehow other people are entitled to my designs? If this is what you are saying then it is no different then a large corporation engaging in corporate espionage. What you seem to be asserting that it is moral for the public to just take and use anything they want. What are you going to assert next that me owning a house id theft? Or that I should just let people in my studio and let them have whatever they want? BTW I have no monopoly on any damn thing, everybody and their brother in law and aunt carve or work with wood, and make greetings cards, and weld and work with metal Etc. I am not screwing the public out of what they all do not already own themselves.

Seriously have you ever owned your own business?
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Lacking in both legal and moral? Then Ill just keep all my ideas to myself and not risk the vultures that are lying in wait for me to do all the work for them.

Let me get this straight, you assert that if I create my artwork that somehow other people are entitled to my designs? If this is what you are saying then it is no different then a large corporation engaging in corporate espionage. What you seem to be asserting that it is moral for the public to just take and use anything they want. What are you going to assert next that me owning a house id theft? Or that I should just let people in my studio and let them have whatever they want? BTW I have no monopoly on any damn thing, everybody and their brother in law and aunt carve or work with wood, and make greetings cards, and weld and work with metal Etc. I am not screwing the public out of what they all do not already own themselves.

Seriously have you ever owned your own business?
Click to expand...

People can "steal" ideas from businesses, they do it all the time.
If your woodcarving business is not turning a profit and someone else finds a way to do so, should they be denied the right to engage in that business, because you started it first?

Just because you invest time and capital into something, doesn't entitle you to a profit.
The real question is, do you even know what you're talking about?
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
People can "steal" ideas from businesses, they do it all the time.
If your woodcarving business is not turning a profit and someone else finds a way to do so, should they be denied the right to engage in that business, because you started it first?

Just because you invest time and capital into something, doesn't entitle you to a profit.
The real question is, do you even know what you're talking about?
Click to expand...
Plenty of other people as I mentioned have businesses much like what I own. What I am doing anyone else can do, except copy my designs. Those designs are an extension of myself. It would take stealing the designs to copy them. They would need to reverse design it. Which means that the work that I did in designing they would be stealing from me. Many people carving eagles or dragons but the style the way I carve mine is my signature. I see no reason why someone else cannot create their own designs themselves and develop their own signature style. Even if my business is slow (which it is carvers do not work fast) that does not mean anyone has the right to steal my designs and put me out of work.

The real question is, do you even know what you're talking about? If you dont want to debate just say so, dont try **** like that. Obviously I know what I am talking about, if I didnt I would not have said anything. Just because you disagree does not mean that I am uneducated. But if we are going to play that game; I have been reading your posts and you seem to be lacking on this subject.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Plenty of other people as I mentioned have businesses much like what I own. What I am doing anyone else can do, except copy my designs. Those designs are an extension of myself. It would take stealing the designs to copy them. They would need to reverse design it. Which means that the work that I did in designing they would be stealing from me. Many people carving eagles or dragons but the style the way I carve mine is my signature. I see no reason why someone else cannot create their own designs themselves and develop their own signature style. Even if my business is slow (which it is carvers do not work fast) that does not mean anyone has the right to steal my designs and put me out of work.

The real question is, do you even know what you're talking about? If you dont want to debate just say so, dont try **** like that. Obviously I know what I am talking about, if I didnt I would not have said anything. Just because you disagree does not mean that I am uneducated. But if we are going to play that game; I have been reading your posts and you seem to be lacking on this subject.
Click to expand...

So what if someone can take your designs and make them better?
Should they be prevented from doing so?

Did you create all your designs from a void or did the inspiration come from something else?

Whether you like it or not, your designs are not totally your own.
 
A copyright shouldn't last more that 10 years max. After that the product should be left up to the markets to determine improvements and different uses for the product. Also it should never be able to be renewed. It's free game. All great things created in society were made great things because other's contributed to it. The only people who benefit from copyrights are people that use it as their only "great idea" they had their entire life. Set thoughts to stun! lol Well that's my 2 cents worth.
 
Lacking in both legal and moral? Then Ill just keep all my ideas to myself and not risk the vultures that are lying in wait for me to do all the work for them.
Click to expand...

Its your choice. Thankfully, western civilization can probably live without your wood carvings. Not to mention that nobody cares enough to copy your designs anyways.

Let me get this straight, you assert that if I create my artwork that somehow other people are entitled to my designs? If this is what you are saying then it is no different then a large corporation engaging in corporate espionage. What you seem to be asserting that it is moral for the public to just take and use anything they want. What are you going to assert next that me owning a house id theft? Or that I should just let people in my studio and let them have whatever they want? BTW I have no monopoly on any damn thing, everybody and their brother in law and aunt carve or work with wood, and make greetings cards, and weld and work with metal Etc. I am not screwing the public out of what they all do not already own themselves.
Click to expand...

You don't understand what you are talking about. Copyright exists to serve society. The government temporarily restricts the natural rights of everyone to distribute works as they by granting a monopoly on distribution on a specific work. The financial incentive from that monopoly promotes the creation of new works. Copyright expires, the work then enters the public domain and society is enriched by having access to new creative works. Copyright, like all government granted monopolies, is simply a practical requirement not granted because you are special snowflake who is morally entitled to it.

Seriously have you ever owned your own business?
Click to expand...

Copyright exists to allow an author to make a living writing books rather waiting tables, or recoup production costs on a film. You don't need 120 year copyrights to make a living being an artist, its simply a way for heirs or corporations get money without doing any work by getting a government handout.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
So what if someone can take your designs and make them better?
Should they be prevented from doing so?
Click to expand...
Yes they should be prevented from using my design without asking for permission. My work is a part of my identity I put my personal touch on my products. Someone taking my decisions to me is not much different then someone taking my name, that is why my style is my signature. No one else carves in the exact way that I do. In order for someone to take my design they have to steal my signature and my identity as a carver with it.

Did you create all your designs from a void or did the inspiration come from something else?
Click to expand...
Void now thats an interesting choice of words. I did not draw from anyone elses designs, all my designs were thought of by me alone.

Whether you like it or not, your designs are not totally your own.
Click to expand...
Well that is your opinion and that is all that it is. My designs are my own, no one thought them up but me.

Anyways you are cherry picking trying to apply a universal philosophy to a world that is anything but universal. The part of the equation that you are leaving out is liberty. It is my liberty to own what I create. Which is a major factor in the liberty that this nation was built on.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Void now thats an interesting choice of words. I did not draw from anyone elses designs, all my designs were thought of by me alone.
Click to expand...

Don't be ridiculous. Every last thing you have ever designed was influenced by the works of artists that came before you.

Hell, how would you even build your designs if not for tools that others designed before you? Shouldn't you be paying them?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom