Subject: Re: Intellectual Property Reform
From: "Karsten M. Self" <>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 11:22:26 -0800
Fri, 11 Jan 2002 11:22:26 -0800
on Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 01:44:22AM -0800, Kevin A. Burton ( wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> Just some things I have been thinking of.
> Ever since the source code for Quake 2 was released
> I have been really thinking about this issue.
> I think ID software did a GREAT job here.  They made money and at the
> same time contributed back to the community.
> I would have NO problem within having a system of copyright for
> software that expired after 3-5 years and required that the source
> code go back to the public.

For many proprietary software companies, their own old product, even
five year old product, is a substantial competitor.  It's no small
secret that Microsoft must cannibalize its own established base to sell
new product (they've exploited their ability to grow marketshare, and
there's little current growth in the overall market).  Even sales of MS
Windows 3.x remain surprisingly high, as does Win95, now a seven year
old product.

This creates a significant incentive to oppose such a revision.  Lessig
proposes shortened copyright term, with extensions available on a fee
basis.  His term suggestion is on the order of 50 years, essentially
rolling the clock back to the situation in the early 1970s.


Karsten M. Self <>
 What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?              Home of the brave                    Land of the free
We freed Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA!
Geek for Hire            

["application/pgp-signature" not shown]