[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [dvd-discuss] Argument: NO extensions can be constitutional. Eldred related -- of DVD interest
- To: "'dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu'" <dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu>
- Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Argument: NO extensions can be constitutional. Eldred related -- of DVD interest
- From: "Ballowe, Charles" <CBallowe(at)usg.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 13:46:01 -0600
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeremy A Erwin [mailto:jerwin@gmu.edu]
>
> Yeah, but the government will assert that the longer
> copyright terms are
> necessary to offset the falling costs of piracy. Longer copyright
> term -> more to time to offset initial costs. (see
> Landes/Posner, 1989).
>
But, couldn't that be countered with the fact that distribution costs
are falling? The only real cost with most copyrighted material is
advertising -- unless you're talking about movies where they'll
spend $250M and end up with 'Water World'...