Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 28th Nov 2012 15:17 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 543525
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: The source of Microsoft's monopoly.
by lucas_maximus on Thu 29th Nov 2012 12:16
in reply to "RE[2]: The source of Microsoft's monopoly."
RE[3]: The source of Microsoft's monopoly.
by zima on Sat 1st Dec 2012 09:35
in reply to "RE[2]: The source of Microsoft's monopoly."
Copyright should really be reworked to much, much shorter copyright terms and to distinguish between completed works and ongoing works
Perhaps giving copyright protection should also require placing the source code to works in some kind of escrow.
We have the "source code" to books - because, luckily, the "source code" to a book is the text, the consumed work itself.
Not so with films, music, or closed-source software - even when it's out of copyright, they can't be mashed up as easily as a book. But if, after copyright lapses, we'd get pre-mixed tracks of audiovisual media, or the code to formerly closed source software...




Member since:
2006-02-15
Software Patents which are bullshit are the problem.
Hmm. Personally, I believe copyrights are also a problem. You know how nowadays things can have copyright on them for hundreds of years, long after the original creator has deceased, and how fair use - rights are being stomped on ever harder and so on? Copyright should really be reworked to much, much shorter copyright terms and to distinguish between completed works and ongoing works like e.g. Linux is an ongoing work, whereas Elvis Presley's albums are completed works.
That said, copyright is not the issue on this particular topic and on that I agree with you.