Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I'm not really anti-copyright, though the timeline should be dramatically reduced back to something similar to its original 14 years with registration (maybe less).

The goal of copyright was to promote the progress of science and useful arts for the benefit of the public, giving limited time monopolies to creators is a means to that end. It was meant as an incentive to create, not some way to perpetually enrich creators (or corporations that buy the rights) forever at the expense of the public.

It's been distorted to basically give creators/companies rights forever automatically (and even retroactively) by continuing to extend it each time it comes up for expiration. It now serves to do the opposite of its intended goal by limiting the ability for people to create things because they could be violating copyright.

I think the issue here is not the existence of copyright itself, but how it's being applied to publicly funded research because of an existing incentive structure where universities and academics are locked in a battle for prestige that's doled out by these journals that then control access.

If the public is funding the research then the public should have access to the research.




I agree with everything you're saying here. Publicly funded research should have long since been mandated to provide open access.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: