decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Blanket licencing | 397 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Blanket licencing
Authored by: Wol on Monday, November 19 2012 @ 12:23 PM EST
No you DON'T want that. It would, for instance, gut the GPL of its teeth :-)

Copyright, at least for say the first two 15 year terms, should be pretty strict
- no *compulsory* licensing - end of!

If, as a singer or novelist or musician or whatever, I *choose* to join a pool
licencing scheme, that's fine. Like for example, I've put my photos on flickr
into the Getty pool. But that is MY choice, as the copyright holder. You - or
Holloywood :-) - or any/everybody else should NOT be able to pay a licencing fee
to some arbitrary licencing group (who probably won't forward me a penny,
anyway!) to be able to use my work. Think of the poor copyright holder! :-)

Once the 15 or 30 year limit is up, then fine, maybe pool licencing is okay. But
it would be interesting :-) to say that if you renew active copyright for the
next two ten-year terms then they aren't covered by compulsory pool terms :-) -
you might be amazed at the number of works that people think are worth paying
for to keep out of the pool :-) I'd actually registrations to be restored (not
just renewed) to take works out of the pool! Any licence granted by the pool
while the work is unregistered remains valid, but re-registering the work stops
new pool licences from issuing. Think of the poor copyright holder :-)

And of course, once the 50 years are up, the twist that only the work's
*creator* can renew the copyright ... well ... that would help stuff enter the
Public Domain nicely :-)

Cheers,
Wol

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • Preservation - Authored by: Wol on Monday, November 19 2012 @ 01:04 PM EST
  • hmm - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 19 2012 @ 02:19 PM EST
    • hmm - Authored by: Wol on Tuesday, November 20 2012 @ 07:14 AM EST
Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )