@sir This is interesting! I find it interesting that you would argue for copyright protections only * after * a certain amount of time, not before; this is a fascinating concept.
I hate DRM. But I would argue for time-based DRM in this scenario, so the limitations are imposed after it's out of the public domain.
@realcaseyrollins sorry, I don't think you understood me. I'm basically arguing for a return to the original intent of copyright here.
@realcaseyrollins oh, I see the confusion.
>copyrighted information enters the public domain before it becomes obsolete (5-10 years?)
Better phrased as: copyrighted information enters the public domain such that the time when it enters the public domain is prior to the obsolecense of that information
@realcaseyrollins not yet, except maybe some of the older ones.
@realcaseyrollins aye, and for sure its source material
@sir I like this idea.
@realcaseyrollins I would be open to discussing a middle ground where copyrighted information enters the public domain before it becomes obsolete (5-10 years?), let alone before anyone who ever saw it in its original form is dead. It would be necessary to defend fair use even inside of that time period, and to roll back some obnoxious interpretations of copyright which lead to things like mashups or even the opening beats to "Ice Ice Baby" being cause for suit. I would also demand the abolishment of DRM.