That is why I added the clause that the author or developer would be immune from such legislation. I'm talking about a company that buys the rights to something, then kills it. <ahemMicrosoftUrp>
Bob On Jan 3, 2013, at 10:29 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: > Robert Sneidar wrote: > > > There ought to be some kind of clause in copyrights where if a > > producer who is not the author or developer of something sits > > on it and does not produce a product from it within a certain > > time frame, say 5 years, the author has the right to reproduce > > it themselves. > > While I can appreciate the sentiment, I have to say I would disagree with > this in practice. > > The most important element of intellectual property is the international > respect for the act of creation, the recognition that the creator of a work > has complete say over how it's distributed from the very moment of creation > through a period of at least several decades afterward. > > This is essential to maintain the motivation for creation. After all, if > there's no motivation to create, there's nothing to argue about distribution > over, since the work would never have existed to begin with. _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
