Quoting Simon Willard: Copyright law is a fascinating subject. This diavlog only nibbles around the edges of the big questions. What is the real purpose of copyright law? Can we agree what that purpose should be? How extensive should be the protections?

I have a sense that we've gone much too far. Our cultural, artistic and intellectual heritage is locked away behind copyright "protections". This works against American citizens in general and works to the detriment of the promulgation of American ideals around the world. That third world societies openly flout our laws, and reproduce American work, ultimately benefits us.

Protection encourages people to be creative. Walt Disney should be able to copyright the Mickey Mouse character in order to make a living from his creativity. But Walt is long gone. The law now protects the interests and image of a large corporation. Sure, corporations can be creative too. But why can't the people take ownership of Mickey after all these years? Why can't I publish the works of James Joyce on my web site? Or the recordings of Elvis?

Are there any commenters who would like to defend our copyright law?

Quoting Simon Willard: Protection encourages people to be creative. Walt Disney should be able to copyright the Mickey Mouse character in order to make a living from his creativity. But Walt is long gone. The law now protects the interests and image of a large corporation. Sure, corporations can be creative too. But why can't the people take ownership of Mickey after all these years? Why can't I publish the works of James Joyce on my web site? Or the recordings of Elvis?

Are there any commenters who would like to defend our copyright law?

Quoting Simon Willard: Are there any commenters who would like to defend our copyright law?

the inheritors of an artist's estate should benefit from the continuing popularity of that artist's work