Benjamin Geer on Sun, 14 May 2000 13:12:32 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Nettime-bold] Copyright and forgery |
On Fri, May 12, 2000 at 07:30:54PM -0400, Decklin Foster wrote: > We need to ask ourselves two things: (1) Does our government still > represent the public? and (2) Is copyright still a good trade? > > Do note that (2) is not an all-or-nothing issue. It may be that case > that trading away the right to copy benefits society up to a certain > point, but things like authors-life-plus-70-years and the DMCA are far > into the land where the costs outweigh the benefits. I tend to agree, but there's one possibility that bothers me. Consider what happened to James Joyce's novel, _Ulysses_, when his estate allowed the copyright to lapse for a few years. Random House published a `reader's edition', in which they simply changed all the parts that they thought were difficult to understand. The result is a novel which is not Joyce's _Ulysses_, but which is being sold under that name. I was horrified at the thought that unuspecting readers would believe that this was _Ulysses_. It seems to me that, in the absence of copyright protection, there ought to be some protection against what you might call `forgery of existing works'. Random House should be allowed to publish their novel, but they shouldn't be allowed to use Joyce's name or the title _Ulysses_. Benjamin Geer _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list Nettime-bold@nettime.org http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold