The opinion about Constructive Proposal for Copyright Reform

The opinion about Constructive Proposal for Copyright Reform

Having read and analyzed the Constructive Proposal for Copyright Reform, I can say that I fully agree that copyright needs to be reformed. Commercial activity generates income, so commercial copying really makes sense to pay for it, while non-commercial copying and use are free for as long as the latter is not used for financial purposes by private individuals. Such a distribution really makes sense, since, under such a reformation, commercial activity continues to work. In the book, there are told about 6 points of the reformation and each of them will be elaborated further.

The first point is that moral rights remain unchanged. In other words, the author must remain the author. I absolutely agree with this, since appropriating other people's merits is illegal.

The second point is free non-commercial sharing. This means that private citizens who want to use copying for personal purposes are not required to pay for it. So it was before and so it should be now because such copying is done by private individuals without selfish goals.

The next point is 20 years of commercial monopoly, which means that copyright terms must not exceed 20 years. At the moment, the terms of protection are life plus 70 years, which is too long and unprofitable for investors, so reducing the terms is the right decision.

The fourth point is registration after 5 years. Obviously, every work has and should have an author. But if a person wants to use someone's work, he will not be able to use it legally, since this work is subject to copyright, but the author cannot be found anywhere. In this case, point number 4 can help, which allows you to legally use the work for up to 5 years until registration occurs and the right becomes publicly available.

Next comes free sampling. This implies the legal use of texts, works, sound melodies, etc., already created by someone. I agree with this for so long as it is very difficult for musicians, directors, artists and not only creative personalities to come up with something new today and not intersect with something old and forgotten. No wonder they say that the new is the well-forgotten old. I believe that this is a very correct step, because even scientists, in order to make some discoveries, need to take something as a basis, and the basis, in this case, is the previous research of other geniuses.

And the last point is the ban on DRM (Digital Rights Management). Personally, I believe that DRM violates the rights of consumers because it significantly limits their ability to legally use the work, so DRM should be prohibited.

In the end, I can conclude that I fully agree with the copyright reforms and believe that they should be introduced as soon as possible since all of the above points are aimed at improving the rights of consumers, while not forgetting the authors.