Question Copyright

Radical copyright reform.

[Question Copyright @qco]

We just updated our post to add a key point:

Government-chosen, government-mandated automated censorship technology is especially bad because it won't stop with copyright-based censorship -- the temptation to use it for other things will be irresistible.

https://t.co/He7eWET8WY

[Question Copyright @qco]

@jeffubois Shoulda flagged you on that!

[Question Copyright @qco]

Same censorship, different day:

Why the so-called "Standard Technical Measures" in the so-called "SMART Copyright Act of 2022" are still just as terrible when *everyone* is required to implement them as they were when only some did. Who'd have guessed?

https://t.co/He7eWET8WY

[Question Copyright @qco]

@jeffubois Couldn't have said it better, @jeffubois.

https://t.co/He7eWET8WY

[Question Copyright @qco]

The muse came bearing gifts: @ninapaley has completed "Apocalypse Animated" and the results are irreverently powerful (that's not a contradiction, it turns out):

https://t.co/O8dPzOedIO

Congratulations, Nina! And blessings upon you for releasing it all under a Free license.

[Karl Fogel (@[email protected]) @kfogel]

It's done -- @ninapaley has finished animating the apocolypse! All 22 chapters of the Book of Revelation from the New Testament. She's been working on this every day since October! See her post at https://t.co/zvjbG4tJlU, and then be revelated at https://t.co/CrJlILAxZS .

[Karl Fogel (@[email protected]) @kfogel]

@floydwebb I wish they would do so! But it's also a losing argument to tell one of the rare artists who makes a lot of money from the copyright monopoly system that they should give up some of that monopoly.

Instead, the state should create less monopoly in the first place.

(/cc @qco)

[Question Copyright @qco]

@ehasbrouck @kfogel @michaelcapobian @CarlaSchroder @internetarchive @joshsimmons @AuthorsGuild Thanks -- these arguments make sense in terms of potential revenue loss. Since online-based per-view revenues should also be easier to track, compared to quarterly royalty checks, is it possible to get *some* sense of numbers here? We don't need a perfect controlled experiment.

[Question Copyright @qco]

@ehasbrouck @kfogel @michaelcapobian @CarlaSchroder @internetarchive @joshsimmons @AuthorsGuild Thank you for the explanation.

So does anyone have any numbers on how much they've lost?

[Question Copyright @qco]

@ehasbrouck @kfogel @michaelcapobian @CarlaSchroder @internetarchive @joshsimmons @AuthorsGuild Sure, that's a lost sale, at least as I meant the phrase: let's count loss of revenue as a lost sale (even if it was just a "sale" of a page view rather than of an entire book). Call it a lost micro-sale.

[Question Copyright @qco]

@ehasbrouck @kfogel @michaelcapobian @CarlaSchroder @internetarchive @joshsimmons @AuthorsGuild (And it may end up driving a new sale, in fact -- at least, that's what seems to happen for those of us who let stuff circulate in a pro-sharing way. However, it's hard to gather reliable data on these phenomena in either direction, of course.)

[Question Copyright @qco]

@ehasbrouck @kfogel @michaelcapobian @CarlaSchroder @internetarchive @joshsimmons @AuthorsGuild A direct substitution is when an event that would generate revenue for the author is replaced by one that does not generate revenue. If the latter happens and is *additional* -- e.g., someone's exploring and this doesn't represent a lost sale -- then that's not a substitution.

[Question Copyright @qco]

@ehasbrouck @kfogel @michaelcapobian @CarlaSchroder @internetarchive @joshsimmons @AuthorsGuild (I wasn't sure what you meant by "average value per click", so maybe I misunderstood what you were saying.)

[Michael Capobianco @michaelcapobian]

@qco @ehasbrouck @kfogel If you're interested in seeing what a good catalog could look like, check out https://t.co/JQIW6qhzLK, an entirely volunteer effort that puts the LOC to shame.

[Question Copyright @qco]

@michaelcapobian @ehasbrouck @kfogel Thanks -- yeah, there are definitely complexities here that make this a non-trivial undertaking. But probably not impossible either...

My kingdom for an uninterrupted six months in which I could just work on stuff like this, sigh :-). I'm sure you've had the same thought.

[Question Copyright @qco]

@michaelcapobian @ehasbrouck @kfogel Actually, though, does the work need to be front-loaded like that?

With a proper escrow system, donations can come in for a particular author (or author+book combination), and *then* -- once it's clear it's worth it -- the work to find and verify the author can take place.

[Question Copyright @qco]

Solid ideas from @ehasbrouck here -- ideas that would help authors. Is anyone listening at @LibraryCongress and @LibnOfCongress, and @CopyrightOffice?

[Elon Musk is a Nazi. @ehasbrouck]

@qco @michaelcapobian @kfogel Best starting point for this (& rights clearance) would be opening Library of Congress catalog records to allow authors to add metadata including contact info. Authors have asked, but found no open door at LoC. If librarians support this, ask LOC to act (& to listen to authors).

[Question Copyright @qco]

@ehasbrouck @michaelcapobian @kfogel Agreed. If there were a single, easy-to-use clearinghouse for sending donations or "thank-you" payments to authors, people would use it! That's what we found when we tried it for one work (https://t.co/qMH6Cc0BqR).

The key is making it really easy, I think -- frictionless.

[Question Copyright @qco]

@wwahammy @kfogel Thanks, @wwahammy.

It's amazing how much moral valence people will invest into a temporary statutory monopoly. Where were all these people when the experiments were running the *other* way -- when copyright terms were being retroactively (!) extended, against all logic?