Post 3520201 by KitRedgrave@cybre.space
 (DIR) More posts by KitRedgrave@cybre.space
 (DIR) Post #3520201 by KitRedgrave@cybre.space
       2019-01-29T19:35:08Z
       
       0 likes, 1 repeats
       
       hot takeif you have a work under copyright but it's out of print, you should not be able to stop people from getting and enjoying that work.
       
 (DIR) Post #3520219 by Canageek@cybre.space
       2019-01-29T19:41:43Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @KitRedgrave I've long thought there should be a five year limit: If it is out of print for five years, public domain. Sure, you have the right to make money on it, but if you don't use it, you lose it.
       
 (DIR) Post #3520251 by msh@coales.co
       2019-01-29T19:45:09Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @KitRedgrave yeah copyright should line up closer with how trademarks work.That is, in order to retain copyright the holder should be obligated to make that work available to some reasonable degree. If a work is abandoned for a number of years (or worse, actively suppressed while at the same time it remains unused by the holder) then copyright should be revoked.I think the suppression of abandoned copyrighted works, from old video games to classic movies, damages society.
       
 (DIR) Post #3520329 by jessmahler@wandering.shop
       2019-01-29T19:47:34Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @Canageek @KitRedgrave I'll quibble -- a lot of authors are stuck in a catch-22 where they still hold copyright, but can't print the book because publisher still has print rights.All use rights should revert to copyright holder FIRST, before anything else.Then, if the actual copyright holder has the use rights and isn't doing anything with the work, I'd be willing to discuss when release to public domain would be appropriate.
       
 (DIR) Post #3520376 by Canageek@cybre.space
       2019-01-29T19:48:49Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @jessmahler @KitRedgrave Fair point. Possibly a series of five year steps, so if the book has been out of print it reverts to the authors, and if they don't get it into print within five years, it reverts to public domain.
       
 (DIR) Post #3520503 by eldergoth@sfbubble.net
       2019-01-29T19:51:33Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @Canageek @KitRedgrave As long as there's a corresponding (and shorter) expiry period after which the author is free to negotiate a new publisher. With that, I'd back this.I gather it's a popular thing with record companies, to bury an album with failure to promote it, then claim it as a tax write-off. Oh, that was the culmination of your life's work as a musician? Sucks to be you, but we own it so we can do what we want.
       
 (DIR) Post #3520553 by Canageek@cybre.space
       2019-01-29T19:52:42Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @eldergoth @KitRedgrave Yeah, people have pointed that out. So make it gradiated, and have a mandatory reverts to creator period if the company leaves it out of print.