Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: geode00 who wrote (169906)	8/26/2005 1:00:39 AM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (1) of 281500

>> I don't know what you have against a corporation having the rights to a character. I have nothing against that. I am against the relatively recent lobbying and manipulation to increase the time frame they could have exclusive rights to it. They did not have this much time for it when they created and promoted it and they should stick with the deal they agreed to rather than buy politicians to change the rules. >> Should everyone be able to publish and sell copies of Harry Potter as soon as the first book rolls out the door? Nope. I believe the original copyright laws gave 10 years of protection plus one or two renewals. This is plenty of reward in the form of exclusive rights. But there is a big difference between 20 years and infinity (which is what it practically is today) or even the 80 years that Disney has gotten so far from Mickey. The purpose of any law should be the best welfare of the society. Had Disney been held to the copyright laws, they would have been motivated to innovate and create more interesting characters. As it stands, they are just eating off the works of dead people. I think they should get off the behinds and do some creative work for a change.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next