• Syrc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I still think if copyright laws weren’t so oppressive, 50 years would be fair (And still a huge improvement from the current situation).

    Maybe have it in tiers or something? First 10 years: full copyright - until 30: similar products allowed, but no blatant reproduction - until 50: reproduction allowed as long as it’s not for-profit - post 50: public domain?

    • Teils13@lemmy.eco.br
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Humm…, i don’t think this scheme would work out in practice. The definitions of several concepts are fuzzy, and therefore can be circumvented or challenged or abused by all sides of the equation. What is a ‘similar product’ that is allowed after 30 years (and therefore what is a ‘dissimilar product’ that would be forbidden before), how would a non-profit that just pays high salaries to its managers fare between the marks of 30 and 50 years (and just gives some little money to research or charity). And again, why give artists and creative companies so much more time of IP protection than we give STEM inventors and companies time in patents (this random site claims patents last 15 to 20 years only) ?