Re: [dvd-discuss] Must Copyright terms be uniform?

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

Basing it upon income is not a very equitable solution. 
Furthermore, is copyright a TAX? That's exactly what basing it 
upon profit or income is. I don't think one should debase the notion 
of copyright by making it one other way for the government to 
squeeze money out of citizens without even giving them the ability 
to file an income tax return on. Furthermore, the purpose is to 
promote not to generate income.(OH that's great that it has done 
so nicely but that is secondary). The purpose of copyright is to 
promote progress equally. If the other forces change the equality, 
change the forces.

No...Social engineering through creative taxation has not been a 
great success. I don't see that attempting copyright reform through 
the same accounint procedures will accomplish much either. 

Date sent:      	Thu, 8 Nov 2001 04:02:22 +0100
From:           	Tom <tom@lemuria.org>
To:             	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject:        	Re: [dvd-discuss] Must Copyright terms be uniform?
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> On Wed, Nov 07, 2001 at 05:15:01PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
> > cost=profit/author's_share+trivial_admin_fee
> > 
> > Where profit must be obtained via GAAP might do the trick, but even
> > GAAP allows for "creative financing"...
> 
> why the obsession with profit? why not simply take the income? that's
> much harder to cheat at (number of items sold * price per item).
> 
> it also makes the fee negligable for non-profit works.
> 
> 
> -- 
> -- http://web.lemuria.org
> --