Tax after 50th year or lifetime plus 50 years?

[Mary Minow <minow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Do you really mean 50th year?  Or do you mean to use the preexisting (pre-
CTEA) and are referring to lifetime PLUS 50 years? 

For corporate works, that would be  95 years from publication date (or 120 
years from creation). A corresponding tax could be imposed after 75 years from 
publication (or 100 years from creation) to roll it back to pre-CTEA.

If we're using those benchmarks, I think it's a good idea to make it clear ... to 
avoid the backlash like this one 
http://salon.com/tech/letters/2003/01/27/copyright/index.html

If you really do mean 50th year, I'm in favor of it. I just don't think it has a 
chance today.

Mary Minow
http://www.librarylaw.com



>In response to the stunning decision in Eldred v. Ashcroft, we have come
up with an idea that we would like discussed here.

It is for a tiny tax on works in the 50th year of copyright.  If the tax
is not paid, the work would enter the public domain.  Thus works with no
commercial value would enter the public domain much as they would
earlier when the term expired.  Works with commercial value would be
paid for and would enjoy the current copyright term.  The tax could go
to support the registration process.

Maybe 50 years of copyright is too long.  The Economist has spoken out
for a 14 year renewable term.  But we recognize we have to make
significant compromises with the strong copyright interests in Hollywood
in order to persuade Congress about the benefits of this proposed act.

For more information, please see
http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/lessig/blog/archives/EAFAQ.html

What do you think?

____
"Eric"    Eric Eldred   mailto:ericeldred@xxxxxxx
http://www.eldritchpress.org  "Eldritch Press"

--