7·
1 year agoBig same. I’ve spent the last 30 years arguing (and voting) for sustainable policies and environmental regulations, but what little progress has been made is woefully insufficient. I did my best, but obviously humanity doesn’t actually want to survive.
The first 20 years should be free. I think that’s a reasonable timeframe for an author to make a reasonable amount of money from a work - or at least to determine if it’s worth extending the copyright.
After the initial 20 year period, it should need to be renewed every decade, on an increasingly steep scale. Let’s face it - some works can go on making money for a very long time. I think the creators deserve to continue making money off their works if they can, but only if it’s really worth it to them, and they’re pretty sure that the work will continue to be increasingly profitable. I suggest that the fees to extend the copyright be based on the profits from the work, and should increase with each extension, up to say 80% of the previous decade’s profits at 60 years. That way, virtually everything would fall out of copyright by that point, unless the holder was very sure it was going to be incredibly profitable going forward.