tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post3514328577053541049..comments2024-03-28T13:45:42.289+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Green around the gills? Political party seeks to roll copyright back by three centuriesVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-6863242359500058222015-05-05T05:05:04.620+01:002015-05-05T05:05:04.620+01:00Shorter copyrights, please.Shorter copyrights, please.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-46195214070794525102015-05-03T13:28:53.027+01:002015-05-03T13:28:53.027+01:00Life plus 14 years would not only depend on leavin...Life plus 14 years would not only depend on leaving the EU, it would also require that the UK leave the Berne Convention.<br /><br />This would not only reduce authors' and artists' protection in the UK. Potentially they would have no copyright protection whatsoever in many other countries around the world.<br /><br />For a major export industry, overseas royalties would not merely be curtailed 14 years after the author's death, they would never start in the first place.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-86927314821527731992015-05-03T13:14:46.512+01:002015-05-03T13:14:46.512+01:00Jeremy, your link to "academic research"...Jeremy, your link to "academic research" doesn't work (it seems to point to a file on your local C: drive).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-48372537723599740162015-05-03T09:43:52.918+01:002015-05-03T09:43:52.918+01:00The Green Party has plainly been trying to row bac...The Green Party has plainly been trying to row back on this policy as hard as it possibly can -- viz the rather unconvincing attempts to re-present the objective as "14 years after death" rather than the 14 years tout court as expressed in the black-and-white of the document.<br /><br />However, rather more convincing are some of the other points made by Tom Chance, the party's former intellectual property spokesman, <a href="http://tomchance.org/2015/04/24/making-copyright-work-for-creatives/" rel="nofollow">in a long blog-post</a> on the 24th just after this first blew up.<br /><br />In particular he underlines that the Greens are well aware of the international treaties involved -- including the Copyright Term directive and article 7 of Berne.<br /><br />The call for radical copyright term reform arose as part of the party's formal vision-setting process as a long-term aspiration, rather than something it would be concretely pressing to deliver in the next Parliament.<br /><br />He's also "certain" that proposals for change will now be brought to the Green party conference in September -- though it is up to members to get involved to determine what it will be. But the formal policy won't/can't be changed before then -- he argues that it's a strength that MPs can't simply declare policy inoperative on the hoof whenever convenient (unlike other parties); policy created by the membership can only be changed by the membership, and the Greens take the policy decisions of their members seriously.<br /><br />The storm has set off quite a debate, with some (including for example <a href="http://artsyhonker.net/copyright-creativity-and-culture/" rel="nofollow">this musician and composer</a>) holding to the demand for much shorter terms; others calling for perpetual copyright (eg some of the posters on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/814310768659205/" rel="nofollow">this facebook group</a>), others again supporting views similar to <a href="http://www.technollama.co.uk/should-copyright-terms-be-shorter" rel="nofollow">this from kat-friend Technollama</a>, calling for shorter fixed default copyrights, but with the possibility of registration and renewal.<br /><br />Most relevant as an arena for future policy formation will be the discussions in <a href="https://my.greenparty.org.uk/user/login?destination=node/9947" rel="nofollow">this Policy Forum</a> on the members-only part of the party website (party membership required). Debate there has been vigorous, by all accounts!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-22237198118103624872015-05-03T08:52:10.390+01:002015-05-03T08:52:10.390+01:00Misleading title & 'cliche' of 14 year...Misleading title & 'cliche' of 14 year copyright.<br /><br />The proposal is not for 14 years copyright but for a much more timid life plus 14 years. Clearly this does not role back copyright three centuries!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com