Comment by bilbo0s

Comment by bilbo0s 20 hours ago

2 replies

Mmmm..

I don’t know man?

I actually don’t mind 14+14 for corps. Because corps could conceivably never “die”. (In fact, I wouldn’t even be too opposed to getting rid of the +14 part).

But for individual people who make things, I think if they’re alive, it should be theirs. And I’m a guy who’s not a creative.

I just think if you come up with a painting, or story, or video game, why should a big corporate be able to swoop in and just copy it while you’re alive without paying you?

The copyright should lapse after a reasonable amount of time following your death. But while you’re alive, what you made should be yours.

bigbadfeline 17 hours ago

> But for individual people who make things, I think if they’re alive, it should be theirs.

But it is theirs... well, until they sell it. We aren't talking about the things they make but about copies of them. I can't believe there are people who still don't understand the difference.

The copies aren't theirs to begin with, copyright isn't natural property and it's not a natural right, that much is set in stone. Don't be confused by the ridiculous name "Intellectual Property".

I'm not saying the legal right called copyright should not exist but it should be paired back to the terms it was originally limited to, there are good reasons for those limits.

Aloisius 19 hours ago

Corporations can't create copyrighted works, only people can. The date of copyright expires is based on when the actual humans authors die.