How to keep people from reading

[l0st]

In the US is 70 years after the creator's death for works published after 1978.
That avoids situations like Charlie Chaplin had, in which he had to make a few changes to his older movies so he wouldn't lose the copyright while still alive.


That's why registration of any work is recommended, so the creator can prove easily they were the original creators.

Why should Charlie Chaplin need a copyright 70 years on? I agree with allowing people to benefit from their work but 70 years seems like a ridiculous amount of time.

And you missed my point that we can have 70+ year old works that are "flagged" for illegality solely on the basis that "the computer" thinks its a copy.

---

In the case that started this thread, the Internet Archive was freely distributing scanned copies of books, not the books' content as the Project Gutenberg does, and that's what the publishers were against, the free distribution of images of their physical books.
Although the authors own the copyrights for the text, the way the book was printed and the cover are, usually, a creation from the publisher, so that also has a copyright.

So, in this case, as they were copying physical books, there was no "data" they were losing.

Are you skeptic? You sure sound like him.