Re: [dvd-discuss] Extending copyright discourages the creation of new works.

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

Not that I can recall. It's a good argument. THe counter argument is that "well 
these golden oldies provide us with the money to finance the uncertainties of 
finding out who are the next generation by publishing their work". My counter-
counter argument is "But what you are discussing is a monopoly at best with a 
duration so long that it cannot be administered fairly or a perpetual one which 
HISTORY has demonstrated is even worse. See the history leading up to the 
statute of Anne.."

On 23 May 2002 at 17:46, Kurt Hockenbury wrote:

Date sent:      	Thu, 23 May 2002 17:46:34 -0400
From:           	Kurt Hockenbury <khockenb@stevens-tech.edu>
To:             	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject:        	[dvd-discuss] Extending copyright discourages the creation of 
new works.
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> I was reading the National Writer's Union amicus brief for Eldred v.
> Ashcroft, and the thought occurred to me:
> 
> Given that the publishing industry has a finite budget, they will only pay to
> publish a certain number of (books/CDs/movies).  If they have a choice between
> spending money on publishing an older work that still sells (Gone With The Wind,
> The Beatles, Steamboat Willie) versus new works of unknown potential, they will
> almost certainly go with the tried-and-true, at least in part, and spend less on
> publishing new works.  This means the market for new works is decreased, because
> the publishing companies don't have the incentive to seek them out when they can
> go on publishing the same old stuff.
> 
> Sorry if this was obvious and/or discussed before.
>