busyRights to characters, novels, comic books, films, etc. change hands all the time. Some are only partial rights, but other times all rights are for sale and that's what would be useful here. Similarly some are expensive, but many are rather cheap and would be readily accessible. People who decide to sell off their intellectual property may be seeking to have it developed, but frequently they just want to get one last bit of money out of something they don't consider very useful.
Look at minor comic book characters, for example, or campy movies; there is often much potential for further development that is unrealized in the original canon but easily accessed through fanworks. Now imagine how much more awesome this would be if those works could be subsequent canon rather than fanworks.
Continuing the idea, crowdfunders might also commission things for the public domain. Some crowdfunding projects are open-source like Schrodinger's Heroes, licensed through Creative Commons like
June 21 2014, 22:47:08 UTC 7 years ago
Back in the day the Grateful Dead used to encourage folks to tape their shows and share; their business model was built around touring, not album sales, and the swapping of tapes was just free advertising.
Besides. If part of what you're doing isn't just singing for your supper but trying to get a point across (
Yes...
June 21 2014, 22:53:42 UTC 7 years ago
I like that.
>> Back in the day the Grateful Dead used to encourage folks to tape their shows and share; their business model was built around touring, not album sales, and the swapping of tapes was just free advertising. <<
I have discovered, over time, that the increased tendency to harangue people makes me want to avoid their products. It can cost them a review, or lower the level of my recommendation. Conversely performers who treat the audience well and encourage them to share are more pleasing to me. I can't stop people from acting like selfish pricks, but I can deny them my willing support for their customer abuse.
Deleted comment
Well...
June 22 2014, 17:56:13 UTC 7 years ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_States
The challenge is that there's a balance between author need and public need. For someone who creates only a few things, it's not much bother to register them and renew copyright if necessary. For someone who writes a lot -- for example, my thousands of poems -- it's impossible. Life of the author is a long fuse, but at least it's simple to determine whether something is in or out of copyright that way. Adding to that is what really causes the problems.
Right now the main problem we have is that megacorps own cash cows they never intend to give up, and they have the money to just plain bribe the legal system to protect their interests at everyone else's expense.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20020305_sprigman.html
Re: Well...
June 23 2014, 04:42:21 UTC 7 years ago
I wonder if a better way to deal with this is for copyright for the original work to remain in effect for life+N years (where N is long enough to benefit one's immediate family), but for derivative rights opened to the public much earlier.
Re: Well...
June 23 2014, 04:55:00 UTC 7 years ago
For corporate works, there's a set timeframe, which I think is currently 95 years; but what really makes trouble is the bribery that keeps raising the extensions.
>> I wonder if a better way to deal with this is for copyright for the original work to remain in effect for life+N years (where N is long enough to benefit one's immediate family), but for derivative rights opened to the public much earlier. <<
That is an excellent idea.