Hacker News Reader

That's an interesting thought.

Heck: Let's change copyright while we are at it. I have never heard any good arguments why copyright should be longer than 20 years. That is of course never going to happen, but I have a compromise:

20 years exclusive rights. After that: 50 years commercial rights + dual license as CC-BY-NC-SA. That way content creators can earn money by licensing/selling their work for commercial use, and the public can use it non-commercially.

I'm also bothered by the fact that most copyright extensions are retroactive. If something is going to lose its copyright protection in a few years, that work should lose it even if copywright protection is extended.

That's what bothers me the most.

If the purpose of copyright is to incentivize new creation, applying changes to it retroactively only serves to hurt the public.

Extension of copyright law been "sponsored" by MPAA and corporations. So better yet, they should make lobbying illegal again, and treat it as a form of bribe.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com