As a result of the EP’s LIBE committee report on the EU Copyright Regulation, in Feb 2015, I built a Storify page and propose to write a blog article. This page captures some of the resources I used to write it. They come from my blog, the IP Kat, out-law.com, torrentfreak and flickr, where martin Fisch’s picture is embedded in the text and used as a featured image.
The report is hosted here, and published here...
Reda posted the report on Discuto here….
One of the commentators points at Rufus Pollock’s research that states that copyright has no value after 14 years.
The optimal level for copyright has been a matter for extensive debate over the last decade. This paper contributes several new results on this issue divided into two parts. In the first, a parsimonious theoretical model is used to prove several novelpropositions about the optimal level of protection. Specifically, we demonstrate that (a) optimal copyright is likely to fall as the production costs of ‘originals’ decline (for example as a result of digitization) and that (b) the optimal level of copyright will, in general, fall over time. The second part of the paper focuses on the specific case ofcopyright term. Using a simple model we characterise optimal term as a function of a few key parameters. We estimate this function using a combination of new and existing data on recordings and books and find an optimal term of around fifteen years. This is substantially shorter than any current copyright term and implies that existing copyright terms are too long
And we have some more relevant links, the position/law of WIPO and other comments.
- Berne Treaty
- Orlowski at the Register,
- Glyn Moody at Techdirt, there are 0ver 50 comments although many from the US commentators who seem to think that both the US Constitution and the DMCA apply, although they may not be wrong in the latter idea, however many of the comments are about duration, but it’s duration that provides value – it is key
- A very insightful comment arguing that object files (i.e. executable programs) are not creative artefacts, made in reply to Glynn’s Article.
And on Moral Rights, here’s the UK law, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/part/I/chapter/IV, the right to attribution and to non derogation (of the work) now modified by the post Hargreaves reforms; we have the right to parody.