[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] Public Domain Enhancement Bill
- To: dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Public Domain Enhancement Bill
- From: microlenz(at)earthlink.net
- Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 18:26:45 -0700
- In-reply-to: <3EFB109E.B63B3B8C@ia.nsc.com>
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
On 26 Jun 2003 at 9:26, John Zulauf wrote:
Date sent: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 09:26:22 -0600
From: "John Zulauf" <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Public Domain Enhancement Bill
Send reply to: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Kurt Hockenbury wrote:
> > If Disney were really smart, they would support it. Not for brownie points,
> > but for more public domain to pull from.
> > Step one: get this bill passed.
> > Step two: let the public start re-discovering 50+ year old stuff.
> > Step three: when something in the new public domain starts gaining popularity,
> > make a Disney version.
> > C.F. "The Secret Garden".
> And adversaries in the copyright fight or not. Nobody recycles,
> packages, and markets "pre-owned" content better than Disney. Think of
> the number of traditional stories the culturally canonical form of which
> is the Disney version.
> The Sorcerer's Apprentice
> Peter Pan
> I'd like to Lessig pitch it directly to Disney (with a list of
> remarketable "abandonware"). Also deep pockets would allow Disney, et.
> al. to consume omnivorously any smaller rights holding houses without
> the ability to afford re-registry. While this reduces the PD created in
> the first round of registry, the result ROI "follow-up" meetings** would
> cause careful examination for all subsequent years. Also, any
> investment in zombie-ware (the rights are still held clearly, but the
> work isn't no longer in circulation) would tend to drive some attempt to
> ressurect the zombie-ware by bringing it back into print or
> distribution, or reinvention. While not PD enhancing, it is an
> improvement over the current situation.
And if Disney buys up a large percentage of copyright then you order them to
divest it under the Sherman Anti-Trust act. IANAL but a monopoly is a monopoly
isn't it and there is nothing that says that an Intellectual Property Monopoly
is exempt from the act is there?
> **"We spend $X for rights Y... what did we make on it?"