Issues > Copyright Reform

Advocate for the Public Domain Instead of Unlimited Copyright.

America's first copyright law protected an author's work for up to 28 years. Over time that period was extended by statute, and beginning in 1909 and continuing through 1976, a copyrighted work was protected at minimum for 28 years, up to a maximum of 56 years if it was renewed. These periods of protection ensured just compensation for a work's author, but also provided for a robust public domain for the American artist and creator.

However, in 1976, Congress passed the first of two changes in the copyright law that have drastically favored copyright holders to the detriment of the public domain. Today, a corporately owned copyright lasts for 95 years, and an individual's copyright lasts for the remainder of his life plus an additional 70 years. When Congress last drastically extended copyright protection in the 1990s, they did so by a voice vote, thus denying the American public of even a record of which members of Congress endorsed that extension.

Because of these extensions, virtually no works have fallen into the public domain since 1923, and no other works are due to enter the public domain until 2019. The length of protection afforded by our current copyright law violates the original purpose of the Constitution's copyright provision. The public domain has suffered greatly, and primarily to the benefit of large corporate interests. And the mere threat of litigation and financial penalties have left millions of works in legal limbo, protected by copyright but with the owners of those copyrights lost to history.

Ideally, copyright protection should be rolled back to its earlier, more reasonable length. Barring that, Congress should move to strengthen the public domain and stave off unnecessary and obstructive copyrights by requiring a one-time renewal after 50 years, and also by addressing the matter of orphaned works.

Strengthen the Fair Use Doctrine.

As originally intended, the Fair Use Doctrine that was codified in 1976 was to make it easier for free speech to operate in a world increasingly dominated by copyrighted words, images, and objects. In theory, and to a certain degree in practice, it is a boon to free expression.

But the vagueness of the Fair Use Doctrine has hindered those original ideals. Many artists still find themselves facing huge monetary demands for fleeting usages, or else they risk even more expensive litigation to prove their use is fair. Unless a person is willing to expend thousands of dollars on a legal battle, he is faced with either paying the demand or sacrificing a legitimate fair use.

We need to strengthen the Fair Use Doctrine, and make what is and isn't a legitimate fair use more easily understandable, without the need to resort to or the incentive to threaten expensive litigation.