[Foundation-l] Research: Optimal copyright term is about 14 years - Wikimedia-l - lists.wikimedia.org

List overview All Threads
Download

[Foundation-l] Research: Optimal copyright term is about 14 years

[Foundation-l] Eric

Re: [Foundation-l] Future Board...

David Gerard

13 Jul 2007 13 Jul '07

11:57 a.m.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070712-research-optimal-copyright-te… Those of us here who work at freeing content will find this of great interest and possible use. - d.

Reply

Show replies by date

SJ Klein

13 Jul 13 Jul

4:42 p.m.

Much of Rufus's writing is useful for such discussions. I wish this stat was broken down into domains, since the optimal copyright term depends on field and medium and intended distribution. SJ On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, David Gerard wrote:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070712-research-optimal-copyright-te… Those of us here who work at freeing content will find this of great interest and possible use. - d. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Reply

Ray Saintonge

11:15 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Research: Optimal copyright term is about 14 years

David Gerard wrote:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070712-research-optimal-copyright-te… Those of us here who work at freeing content will find this of great interest and possible use.

Considering that this was the term in Queen Anne's Act of 1710, it has taken us 300 years to get back to where we started. And they did it without the benefit of economic formulas. Ec

Reply

David Gerard

14 Jul 14 Jul

12:20 a.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Research: Optimal copyright term is about 14 years

On 13/07/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net> wrote:

Considering that this was the term in Queen Anne's Act of 1710, it has taken us 300 years to get back to where we started. And they did it without the benefit of economic formulas.

How did they get 14 years then? - d.

Reply

Andrew Gray

12:51 a.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Research: Optimal copyright term is about 14 years

On 13/07/07, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On 13/07/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net> wrote:

Considering that this was the term in Queen Anne's Act of 1710, it has taken us 300 years to get back to where we started. And they did it without the benefit of economic formulas.

How did they get 14 years then?

Very good question... might be worth digging into Hansard to see what transpires, though the record of debates that far back is vague at best. Any of the prime movers produce any memoirs? -- - Andrew Gray andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk

Reply

Roger Luethi

16 Jul 16 Jul

5:28 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Research: Optimal copyright term is about 14 years

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 23:20:33 +0100, David Gerard wrote:

On 13/07/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net> wrote:

Considering that this was the term in Queen Anne's Act of 1710, it has taken us 300 years to get back to where we started. And they did it without the benefit of economic formulas.

How did they get 14 years then?

The Act of Anne was basically a slightly modified Stationer's Copyright (which was perpetual and discredited for fostering monopolies and for its historical ties with censorship); its term limit may have been inspired by the Statute of Monopolies 14 years term (twice the duration of an apprenticeship -- a foreigner bringing new technology to the UK enjoyed a monopoly while training two generations of local folks). I think Paul David argued something along these lines. Like any economic model, the model in the paper can be tweaked to get a desired "optimal term". Arriving at 14 years appears to be somewhat of a publicity gag. Roger

Reply

Ray Saintonge

9:46 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Research: Optimal copyright term is about 14 years

Roger Luethi wrote:

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 23:20:33 +0100, David Gerard wrote:

On 13/07/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net> wrote:

Considering that this was the term in Queen Anne's Act of 1710, it has taken us 300 years to get back to where we started. And they did it without the benefit of economic formulas.

How did they get 14 years then?

The Act of Anne was basically a slightly modified Stationer's Copyright (which was perpetual and discredited for fostering monopolies and for its historical ties with censorship); its term limit may have been inspired by the Statute of Monopolies 14 years term (twice the duration of an apprenticeship -- a foreigner bringing new technology to the UK enjoyed a monopoly while training two generations of local folks). I think Paul David argued something along these lines.

"Fostering monopolies?" I'm glad the movie and recording industries aren't out to do that. ;-)

Like any economic model, the model in the paper can be tweaked to get a desired "optimal term". Arriving at 14 years appears to be somewhat of a publicity gag.

I'm not sure that I fully grasp the paper, which somewhat reinforces my impression that when economists use mathematical formulas it's primarily for cosmetic effects. After lamenting the lack of empirical studies, he forthwith launches into a theoretical one that would clearly require a bit of hypothesis testing. Be that as it may it takes the subject into an interesting direction, and it would be nice to see more work done on this. Ec

Reply

Roger Luethi

17 Jul 17 Jul

12:22 p.m.

New subject: [Foundation-l] Research: Optimal copyright term is about 14 years

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:46:44 -0700, Ray Saintonge wrote:

Roger Luethi wrote:

The Act of Anne was basically a slightly modified Stationer's Copyright (which was perpetual and discredited for fostering monopolies and for its historical ties with censorship); its term limit may have been inspired by

"Fostering monopolies?" I'm glad the movie and recording industries aren't out to do that. ;-)

Yeah, the arguments haven't changed all that much over the past centuries. Like the Statute of Monopolies, the Statute of Anne was an attempt to limit the damage inflicted by monopolies.

bit of hypothesis testing. Be that as it may it takes the subject into an interesting direction, and it would be nice to see more work done on this.

I'd be wary of lending credence to economic models even if they support our viewpoint. You'll find an economic model to support any assertion no matter how outlandish. All the magic is in supporting data (if any) and assumptions (always plenty). Roger

Reply

6127

days inactive

6131

days old

wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

7 comments

5 participants

tags (0)

participants (5)

Andrew Gray
David Gerard
Ray Saintonge
Roger Luethi
SJ Klein