[majewsky]

While it sounds nice (from a consumer's perspective) to have no copyright at all, it would prevent a lot of media from being made, e.g. expensive movies.

Movies for well-known franchises could possibly be financed through crowd-funding, but that would make it hard for production companies to make bets in new franchises or directors.

[skookumchuck]

If you can't make money in 20 years for a movie, it's never going to make money.

[fattire]

Everyone's good with this as far as software goes too, right? All apps go public domain after 20 years of release?

[readbeard]

If copyright were shortened to 20 years as suggested, it would be legal to freely distribute copies of Windows 98 and Photoshop 5.0. I doubt that would make a dent in sales of Windows 10 or Creative Cloud. Newer versions of both would still be copyrighted, and there would be no obligation to release any unpublished source code.

[lanterk]

Open Source, more like. A 20 year old software in vanilla state would likely just not run at all in current hardware.

[snuxoll]

Sure, but that's what projects like QEMU/DOSBox/other emulators and compatibility shims are for. There's so much abandonware out there, especially games that are stuck in licensing limbo that can't legally be acquired - and it's only going to get worse going forward as things like licensed middleware, soundtracks, etc. have been thrown into the mix with their own headaches.

[fattire]

@redbeard-- how about VAX/VMS for example? I believe licenses are still being sold for millions of dollars...

[skookumchuck]

Probably for the up-to-date version. Not the 20 year old version.