On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Wallace J.McLean wrote:
Robert Shimmin wrote:
The sad truth is that when approached from an economic point of view, the optimal length is so short that it seems absurd, and nobody takes you seriously after they hear the result. Here's the analysis:
interest copyright rate term 2% 35.0 yr
That's very interesting...
I've done other analyses, based on other grounds.
On the "widows and orphans" theory, that copyright income should be protected not only for the poor starving artists/authors, but also their widows/orphans, life+about 35 years is where the law of diminishing returns kicks in: life+35 years is enough to guarantee the majority of copyrights will actually outlive the majority of the poor orphans that were left behind, assuming western lifespans.
The average age of those "orphans" who are still alive when the copyrights die, would be 75 years. (Of course, no orphan would ever be less than the PLUS in life-PLUS when the copyrights expire.)
One other point about these particular scenarios: Any items that are still selling after so many years should have left behind a fortune more than large enough to support decades of descendants, simply from royalties already received. We are dealing with only the creme de la creme when we consider items still selling after any substantial length of time. Of course, some people think it is fitting and proper to pass laws the only benefit the creme de la creme, especially if they keep the lower classes from having access to anything. Let's face it, every time copyrights are extended another 20 years, that's a million books that we don't see going to the public domain.
Further, 35 years post publication -- let alone post mortem autoris -- is where the number of books still in print dips to less than five percent, at least in the samples I've tested this on, are still even in print, at least in Canada. That is to say, of the books first published in 1954, in 1989 only 4% and change were still in recent print, and many of those only in editions for the blind.
Yes, this figures in pretty well with other estimates I have heard; 4% would be the largest possible number to consider, and, depending on how many were special editions not readily available to the public, probably much less, and again we must consider that those were the best sellers, not likely to be living off government checks. mh