Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention

> The Berne Convention states that all works except photographic and cinematographic shall be protected for at least 50 years after the author's death, but parties are free to provide longer terms, as the European Union did with the 1993 Directive on harmonising the term of copyright protection.

This is not an American thing.

And the Berne convention was four decades before Disney was founded.



From your article: > The United States became a party in 1989.

The person you are responding to is writing about American Copyright. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_St.... The first american copyright law is from 1790, which does in fact predate the bern convention, and our life of the author plus 50 years rule is from the copyright act of 1976, 13 years before the US ratified the bern convention.

So yes, it is an 'American thing' as are all issues of law in the US. And if you think that this kind of convention is meaningfully binding, just checkout the history of the US and other major powers with regards to various other international treaties, like the ICC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court.


Kinda irrelevant if it's an American thing or not. The US didn't become a party to the Berne Convention treaty until 1989, over 100 years later, but had been increasing copyright terms long before that[0]. We (and others) could just as easily withdraw from it, and make our own rules for works that originate in the US. We could even be nice and honor the copyright terms placed on works that originate in Berne Convention countries.

I think the original terms of American copyright are fine to use as a model: 14 years for all works, period. And certainly that's open for debate; even 25 or 50 years would be much more kind to the commons than what we have now. We could even do like we do for patents, and have a relatively short term, with a one-time renewal option for creators who continue to benefit from a work and still care to keep it protected.

[0] https://www.arl.org/copyright-timeline/


> We could even do like we do for patents, and have a relatively short term, with a one-time renewal option for creators who continue to benefit from a work and still care to keep it protected.

The US is part of the WTO and thus a signatory to the TRIPS agreement ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIPS_Agreement )

> TRIPS requires member states to provide strong protection for intellectual property rights. For example, under TRIPS:

> Copyright terms must extend at least 50 years, unless based on the life of the author. (Art. 12 and 14)

> Copyright must be granted automatically, and not based upon any "formality", such as registrations, as specified in the Berne Convention. (Art. 9)

Changing that to a "short term and renewable" would involve leaving or renegotiating the WTO. That is likely a non-starter.


> even 25 or 50 years would be much more kind to the commons than what we have now

More kind perhaps but really anything that prevents you as an adult from building on the works that your grew up on is a shitty deal for society.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: