@PirateRoberts @internetarchive @team I'd be inclined to say that the basis #copyright uses to justify its existence is fundamentally flawed and that it has no place existing.

Unfortunately I don't have a good transcript handy, but this youtuber's two-video series makes for fairly good general idea: https://www.youtube.com/@Patricia_Taxxon/search?query=The%20Golden%20Calf

#AbolishCopyright

@PirateRoberts @internetarchive @team

Congratulations for realising this. Now try and figure out how to get the 190-odd nations who signed the Berne Convention which governs *international* copyright law to simultaneously adopt a new treaty regulating copyright!

(Bear in mind, also, that translations are derivative works. And what about "public performance" of, say, plays or film scripts written by individual people? The devil is in the details!)

@PirateRoberts you need the copyright to apply on derivative works (as far as it uses the original work, as it's now). We are surrounded by derivative works!

It makes no sense that the heirs would hold the copyright of a book if it's verbatim but that there was none for that very same book prepended with a Prologue.

(We could shorten the p.m.a. copyright term, but that's a different issue)

@internetarchive @team @lispi314 @bufalo1973 @cstross

@jebba @internetarchive @team

#HarperCollinsIsMurdoch

That's hard news.

@internetarchive @team read) three times now over the years, this fight is very important.

Maybe more emphasis on freedom, public good, restrictive practices, lack of/rights of ownership (contrasting with the law relating to paid-for physical books etc) and less on the monetary implications of book lending might be good. There are also authors and even publishers who insist that their books not have DRM restrictions etc. Perhaps they could also be persuade to support the fight?