I probably can't convince you because I am not sure myself. My reasoning is that I observe a lot of the really valuable intellectual property is owned by large corporations such as the Disney Corporation, Tolkien Enterprises etc. It isn't for nothing that the last extension of copyright was called the Mickey Mouse copyright act.
Heirs who might inherit IP will lose much of it to death taxes, while corporations do not have that limitation, so if a corporation does not go bust, and if it does not sell a particular item of IP, then it will own it for as long as the IP is valid. If that is for as long as the legal systems that support IP last, that could be a very long time.
In parallel, look at the not very munificent deals that writers get - except the very highest selling ones. Look at the fight that the NUJ has had to carry out so that writers of, say, technical articles that are first printed in a magazine, then later in a compilation and a book, get some royalties from later publication. I never did, but the company that published it did.
Remember what the Garlands said about publishers wanting to own all rights in return for a sniveling payment? Unless you are fairly high on the scale, your choice is take that deal or sell nothing and earn nothing. Do you really feel that the correct ethical situation is then for the corporation to own the IP forever? For the record, I don't!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: intellectual property
Date: 2007-05-15 11:27 pm (UTC)Heirs who might inherit IP will lose much of it to death taxes, while corporations do not have that limitation, so if a corporation does not go bust, and if it does not sell a particular item of IP, then it will own it for as long as the IP is valid. If that is for as long as the legal systems that support IP last, that could be a very long time.
In parallel, look at the not very munificent deals that writers get - except the very highest selling ones. Look at the fight that the NUJ has had to carry out so that writers of, say, technical articles that are first printed in a magazine, then later in a compilation and a book, get some royalties from later publication. I never did, but the company that published it did.
Remember what the Garlands said about publishers wanting to own all rights in return for a sniveling payment? Unless you are fairly high on the scale, your choice is take that deal or sell nothing and earn nothing. Do you really feel that the correct ethical situation is then for the corporation to own the IP forever? For the record, I don't!