‘Rhapsody in Blue’ (1924) just reached the public domain, showing the insanity of U.S. copyright law; The Los Angeles Times, January 4, 2020

Michael Hiltzik, The Los Angeles Times; ‘Rhapsody in Blue’ (1924) just reached the public domain, showing the insanity of U.S. copyright law

"The liberation of all these creations, however, should also be an occasion for mourning. They would have been released to the public domain in the early 1960s, if not for an aggressive campaign staged in Washington by big media companies, especially Walt Disney Co., desperate to keep lucrative control of their copyrighted works for as long as possible.

Copyrights prevent consumers or creators from accessing, building on, or even repurposing artistic works without the permission of the copyright holders or the payment of a fee that can be steep. That’s arguably an obstacle to cultural development, and raises the question of why the heirs should exercise so much power and collect such payouts so many decades after the creators are gone."

Freed From Copyright, These Classic Works Are Yours To Adapt; NPR, January 5, 2019

Milton Guevara, NPR; Freed From Copyright, These Classic Works Are Yours To Adapt

""Copyright has been overextended so many times, largely at the behest of major copyright holders," says author Naomi Novik. "Even though what that actually does is inhibit people from creating new works and sharing these older works." Novik is a founding member of the Organization for Transformative Works, a nonprofit that focuses on preserving fan fiction and art — that is, work created by fans, based on characters and worlds from their favorite written works, film, and TV, which can occasionally come into conflict with copyright law.

"For a character to live, that character has to belong to the audience," says Novik. "Works of art are meant to nourish our collective understanding; they're meant to nourish our conversation." 

Duke Law's entire list of works that entered the public domain this year can be found here."

WHAT IF ‘STAR TREK’ WERE FREE? HOW THE STORIED SCI-FI FRANCHISE COULD INSPIRE COPYRIGHT REFORM; Newsweek, March 5, 2018

Andrew Whalen, Newsweek; 

WHAT IF ‘STAR TREK’ WERE FREE? HOW THE STORIED SCI-FI FRANCHISE COULD INSPIRE COPYRIGHT REFORM

"CBS and Paramount are unlikely to see things the same way. While Star Trek: Discovery press releases trumpet the “ideology and hope for the future that inspired a generation of dreamers and doers,” plans for streaming market domination depend upon exclusivity. The metaphor equating artistic expression and property has become so ingrained that companies regularly reduce their consumers to provisional licensees, subject to whatever controls the copyright holder decides upon, even long after the point of purchase.

“Star Trek stands on the shoulders of giants. It exists because they plundered some of the most interesting stories and memes of science fiction, just as all science fiction writers do, to tell their own story. And to argue that when they did it that was the legitimate progress of art and whenever anyone else does it, it's theft, is pretty self-serving and kind of obviously bullshit,” Doctorow said. “It's a ridiculous thing for a law to ban something that ancient and fundamental to how we experience art.”

Countering the monopoly exercised by copyright holders will require a broader social realignment, under which people come to understand art as a shared cultural endowment, rather than product—a mindset beyond capital."

For the sake of jobs and culture, copyright law must be protected; The Hill, August 2, 2017

John Singleton, The Hill; For the sake of jobs and culture, copyright law must be protected

"The American film and television industries sit at the intersection of art and commerce. Although we often like to think we are simply making art, we also need to make back the investors’ money. And, like in any business, investors want to see a potential path to that profitable return before signing a check. That was as true in 1991 as it is today. The difference is that the emergence of online piracy has had a measureable effect on the health of our industry, threatening the financial success of every single television show, indie film and summer blockbuster.

It’s easy to look at piracy in a vacuum and chalk the illegal streaming of a movie up to a mere $5 or $10 loss for Hollywood investors. Yet the aggregate cost of piracy goes far beyond that. It makes film and television companies far more risk-averse, narrowing their output to that which seems the most bankable, thereby creating a climate in which no one would be willing to take a chance on a 24-year-old with a script about inner city life.

And if they’re not taking those chances, then who is? Where does the next Kenneth Lonergan come from? Sofia Coppola? James Gunn? Paul Greengrass? John Singleton?"

T Bone Burnett Delivers Scathing Message to Copyright Office, Urging Reform: 'Our Culture Is At Stake'; Billboard, February 21, 2017

Dan Rys, Billboard; 

T Bone Burnett Delivers Scathing Message to Copyright Office, Urging Reform: 'Our Culture Is At Stake'

"T Bone Burnett today submitted a five minute video to the U.S. Copyright Office that issued a scathing critique of current copyright laws, taking aim at "mega corporations and web moguls" that "are enriching themselves off the artistic, cultural and economic value everyone else creates," and urging Congress to fix a copyright system that he says threatens the ability of artists and creators to make a living.

At issue is section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) signed in 1998, which includes the "safe harbor" provisions that protect digital service providers such as YouTube from copyright infringement litigation by outlining a system to deal with illegal copyrighted material uploaded to its platform. Burnett, who serves on the advisory board of the Content Creators Coalition (c3) and submitted the video on behalf of the organization, says the current safe harbors provision has failed, allowing the internet to become a "digital black hole.""

[Excerpt from transcript of T Bone Burnett remarks]

The false prophets of the internet may have imagined an egalitarian, open source, creative wonderland, but what we got instead was an exploitative digital black hole that benefits a handful of mega corporations and web moguls. They are enriching themselves off the artistic, cultural and economic value everyone else creates."

Jonathan Nolan Responds To That Westworld Location Theory; Slashfilm.com, 10/17/16

Peter Sciretta, Slashfilm.com; Jonathan Nolan Responds To That Westworld Location Theory:

Minor spoilers re "Westworld" plot themes

[Kip Currier: Viewers of Season 1 of the popular new HBO series "Westworld"--a reimagined reboot of the 1973 film, based on Michael Crichton's eponymous novel--have increasingly seen the protect-at-all-costs value of Westworld's Intellectual Property, as well as privacy concerns. Showrunners Jonathan Nolan and Lisa Joy Nolan touch on these issues below:]

"In regards to the computer terminals where the Delos staff communicate to their loved ones back home, [Lisa Joy Nolan] says:

Regardless of where they are, the park is very, very vast, and you don’t rotate home often. You don’t have open communication where you can just pick up a phone. Even senior people have to go to the coms room – because [the park is] protecting their intellectual property. We’re hoping to paint a portrait of the culture of the corporation.

[Jonathan] Nolan (who was a showrunner on Person of Interest, a series about a computer system that could analyze all forms of public and private data to predict the future) seems to be very interested in the aspect of big brother looking in on our communications. As for how it relates to Westworld, he says the Delos corporation wants to protect its intellectual property and the privacy of the park’s guests:

In Westworld, the value of the park is all in its intellectual property, it’s all in the code. So regardless of the park’s location, they would be extremely careful with that code and making sure its virtually impossible to smuggle it out of the park. And there’s the privacy of the guests – you’re not going to have a good time in Westworld if somebody is Instagramming your activities. I’m amazed [th]at [sic] Las Vegas has survived the Instagram age. In episode 2, when the guests come in, we don’t see this, but we assume these guys have cell phones that they’re not allowed to bring in the park. We very much think this is a path where culture may be going – that we’ll get over-exposed and sick of the interconnectedness of our lives that we’ll hunger for places [that offer disconnected privacy]. We’ll hunger for a moment where we can go back toward having some privacy."

The Acceleration of Open Access; Inside Higher Ed, 8/18/16

Barbara Fister, Inside Higher Ed; The Acceleration of Open Access:

"So much going on. So much positive change in the air.

One fascinating aspect of this is trying to figure out how exactly the culture is changing. Librarians found out with their institutional repositories that building it alone doesn’t make them come. Hard work doesn’t necessarily bring on a cultural shift, either; institutional affiliation has less gravitational pull than disciplines and societies. Even within disciplines, it’s hard for projects like bioRxiv and MLA Commons to attract scholars and scientists who feel the systems they are familiar with are good enough, or that making their work open is too risky or too much work. But with so many projects taking off, and with such robust platforms rolling out to challenge whatever the big corporations will have to offer, I’m feeling pretty optimistic about our capacity to align the public value of scholarship with our daily practices – and optimistic about the willingness of rising scholars to change the system."