Creative works are owned by society at large. That's enshrined legally in the Constitution, based on, well, all of history. Copyright, as a legal concept, only started in the time of Queen Anne, if I remember correctly. Copyright, literally the right to copy, demonstrating in its very name that it is about copying not about property, started out at two years. It was then extended to about 15 years in the 1700's, before it lost its privileged status and became part of the public domain. That privileged time has been extended repeatedly. I think this is a lousy thing, for what it's worth, but that's not really relevant. People who argue patent law claim that current patent law stifles innovation (http://www.patentlawinsights.com/2009/05/articles/patentability-1/do-patents-promote-progress-or-stifle-innovation/). It's possible that copyright does the same thing, insofar as it has a similar structure to patent law, although I'm unaware of any studies showing this.
Google clearly should have made reasonably diligent attempts to contact people. But with that said, if they can't contact people, it is obviously in their financial interest, but also in the public interest, to then decide the material in question is orphaned. But I'm a socialist at heart, so I am big on the gains made by society at large, even at the cost of some individuals.
If I were a plumber I'd charge per job. I wouldn't charge people for use of my plumbing work for the rest of my life + 50 years.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Copyright, literally the right to copy, demonstrating in its very name that it is about copying not about property, started out at two years. It was then extended to about 15 years in the 1700's, before it lost its privileged status and became part of the public domain. That privileged time has been extended repeatedly. I think this is a lousy thing, for what it's worth, but that's not really relevant. People who argue patent law claim that current patent law stifles innovation (http://www.patentlawinsights.com/2009/05/articles/patentability-1/do-patents-promote-progress-or-stifle-innovation/). It's possible that copyright does the same thing, insofar as it has a similar structure to patent law, although I'm unaware of any studies showing this.
Google clearly should have made reasonably diligent attempts to contact people. But with that said, if they can't contact people, it is obviously in their financial interest, but also in the public interest, to then decide the material in question is orphaned. But I'm a socialist at heart, so I am big on the gains made by society at large, even at the cost of some individuals.
If I were a plumber I'd charge per job. I wouldn't charge people for use of my plumbing work for the rest of my life + 50 years.