Copyright expiration

[ppera2]

I'm curious how it goes with copyright expiration for different intellectual creations. So, how long lasts copyright for example for music, movies, books etc... ?
Needs copyright holder to pay something for 'official copyright' keeping during time?

[wmansir]

In the US:
http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/training/Hirtle_Public_Domain.htm

In reality the copyright term is indefinite, because whenever they want the corporations can lobby for an extension. And with big corporate donors on one hand and no big pockets on the other, it's easy to predict the results. There was a supreme court ruling a few years ago that said the legislature can extend (retroactivly) the copyright laws without limit.

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by ppera2
Needs copyright holder to pay something for 'official copyright' keeping during time?

Actually no. And this has been a massive thorn in Project Gutenberg's side for years now. Due to previous lobbying by US IP mongers they got the terms and conditions of copyright retroactively changed. Copyright used to only cover those who sought it. And they would have to pay to register. Now it retroactively covers for free all works even of dead authors who had no desire for copyright and can no longer benefit from it anyway. Which means that if Project Gutenberg wishes to transcribe such a work they have to go through a lengthy and expensive process just to show that there is no living copyright holder and that said copyright is useless. Copyright now serves a new master. Namely not the authors it was crafted to serve. Authors have a finite lifespan which the basic period of copyright will far exceed in 99% of all cases. But even though copyright is practically twice the length of even the most long lived authors every few years without fail a motion to retroactively extend it comes up in the senate because the corporations who own almost all copyright have no such life span.

[GWD]

Don't you just love the perennial copyright discussion? I know I do!

Like all passable laws, this is an issue for people with distinct interest in copyright to lobby their local politician with as much clear and concise reasoning as they can. There must be an up and coming congressperson/governor/president wannabe that could use an issue as correcting the copyright law to wax their way into office. It has to be done en mass and have real clear realisations, but surely it could be done.

Copyright, incredibly enough, was originally an instrument to make people create NEW stuff, and not rehash old ideas. Then people decided what constituted a "new" idea, or enough of a "new" idea, and so on and so on and it went to hell in a handbasket ever since. Copyright and financial advantage have become so entangled that the term "idea" no longer has any meaning without "how much is it worth?"

Copyright is now simply a means of telling others how much it will cost them to use an owned, over-used idea... I say "Begone, Right of Copy, Begone from this corporatised world and let us think!"

Far too much sugary soda for me today...

GWD

[ppera2]

Thanx for replies. I think that GWD pointed to essence of whole thing.

But when was that, that laws were made for little man?

Is that explans why new movies are so poor with new ideas?