Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology From: dennis.l.erlich@support.com Subject: MY THOUGHTS ON COPYRIGHT Message-ID: <9510021404.0JRY103@support.com> Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150 X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.35 Distribution: world Date: Mon, 02 Oct 95 14:04:38 -0700 Lines: 116 * jeeze, this sure makes sense * +---------------------------------+ noring@netcom.com (Jon Noring) >I do believe in the necessity of copyright laws, but as I outlined in another >post, the copyright laws have far exceeded what is necessary for the producers >of copyrighted materials to receive fair compensation for their creative >endeavors in the marketplace. Copyright law was established *primarily* to >benefit the public, and I have not heard anybody come up with a reasonable >argument showing that current copyright laws maximize the public benefit and >yet balance the property rights of the owners of the copyrighted materials. >I believe they are way too heavily skewed towards property rights (with, >interstingly enough, marginal benefit to the owners) and against the public >interest and benefit. > >What I'd like to see changed in U.S. copyright law, and which seems to >fulfill the best-of-both-worlds (and up to now seem opposed to each other) >that Tim Smith brought up above: > >1) A roll-back of copyright term to 15-17 years (or so), with *no extensions*, > If the material can't be profitable in the first 15-17 years (e.g., see > patent law), then by extension it will not be profitable by a more extended > term. Today's fast-paced world brought on by rapid technological growth > makes this even more true. > >2) "Born copyright" only lasts for one year, requiring the owner to > register the work in order to get the potential for the full term. > Registration should be streamlined even more than it is now, however. > A full and unedited/unexpurgated copy of the work will be given to the > Copyright office during registration -- works intended to be kept secret/ > private will NOT be accepted for copyright protections as that violates > the Constitutional intent for copyright law in the first place. In > addition, all rights to trade secret status are given up by Copyright > registration. > >3) Extending the Fair Use provision to include the use of the copyright > material for the public benefit/awareness, as well as strengthening the > First Amendment over copyright law (of late, the FA has taken the back > seat to copyright law in an inbalanced way). > >4) The copyrighted work will revert to the public domain, even within the > copyright term, if the owner of the copyright does not make the work > widely available for sale to the *general U.S. public* at a reasonable > market price in any 5 year period of time. In addition, if there is a 5 > year period of time where the work is not "in print" (as defined in the > previous sentence), the owner of the copyright must notify the Copyright > office of this fact so the work can revert to the public domain and that > it is so noted in publicly-available databases. > >5) Limiting court awarded damages for copyright infringement to a maximum > of *actual* damages lost by the copyright owner. This would require the > copyright owner to prove to the court they incurred and/or will incur, > real and demonstrable loses, and what they were, because of the > infringement *in excess of Fair Use*. Of course, special provisions will > have to be made for works which have just been issued and there is not yet > any definitive track record of actual and/or projected sales. > >6) Eliminate the provision in current copyright law allowing for raids/ > seizure of materials used to supposedly infringe copyrights . The > recent pre-trial rulings by the judges who originally authorized such > raids on Scientology critics (Erlich, Wollersheim, Penny, and Lerma) > suggest the court is very uneasy about the Constitutionality of this > provision of Copyright law on both the First and Fourth Amendments, and > by extension the right to privacy. Rather than testing the raid/seizure > provision in court, just eliminate it entirely through Congress. A TRO > (with a limited term) is almost always adequate to stop alleged > infringement activities to give the Defendant and the Plaintiff time to > prepare for litigation. > > >Just my thoughts as both a publisher interested in getting just rewards for >my authors for their intellectual labors, as well as a firm believer in >Freedom of Speech and Religion. Just read alt.religion.scientology for how >Copyright law has been grossly abused by the Church of Scientology organization >to stifle Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion (in the case of FR, against >the Free Zoners who cannot practice the religion of Scientology as they see fit >-- copyright law (as well as trade secret laws), in effect, is being used to >establish the present Church of Scientology as the only practitioner of >Scientology in violation of the Constitutional prohibitions of the Federal >Government from preventing the free worship of religion and of favoring one >religion over another). > >What I propose above should plug most of the "holes" in copyright law and >provide for maximizing the public benefit, yet still retain the protection by >which those producing copyrighted works can reasonably profit from their >creative endeavors. That, I believe, is the balance we all can agree on. > >Jon Noring >OmniMedia > >-- >OmniMedia | OmniMedia's Electronic Bookstore is NOW on the WEB! >9671 S. 1600 West St. | URL: http://www.awa.com/library/omnimedia >South Jordan, UT 84095 | FTP: ftp.awa.com /pub/softlock/pc/products/OmniMedia >801-253-4037 | E-MAIL: omnimedia@netcom.com >------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > GRAND OPENING! OmniMedia's Electronic Bookstore -- Visit it today! > http://www.awa.com/library/omnimedia This should be used as a FAQ whe people want to know what solutions we would propose. Nice work (as usual), Jon. Look for a phatt bonus from the pSyCHiaTriK zOmbI dRuG loARds (aka ars Central Committee) in this month's pay check. +--------------------------------------+ Rev. Dennis L Erlich * * the inFormer * * dennis.l.erlich@support.com + inForm@primenet.com "tar baby"