Orphaned works have long been one of my bugaboo's about the current copyright regime.
I would much prefer copyright be transitioned to a paid for license regime after some suitably long initial term (say 20 years), then those who see continuing commercial value can renew for another 10 year term - and so on up to say 100 years, with increasing fees for every term thereafter.
I think its perfect reasonable to balance the needs of large IP holders - who should be encouraged to do restoration and preservation on the IP they own and letting the commons do those things when there is no viable market for those properties.
I may have a copy of the proceedings from ca. 1982. At the time I was a copy editor, and knew somebody who ran the copy editing for AFIPS and gave me some work. I had thought that the owning societies pulled the plug on the National Computer Conference and AFIPS somewhat earlier than 1990.
Orphaned works have long been one of my bugaboo's about the current copyright regime.
I would much prefer copyright be transitioned to a paid for license regime after some suitably long initial term (say 20 years), then those who see continuing commercial value can renew for another 10 year term - and so on up to say 100 years, with increasing fees for every term thereafter.
I think its perfect reasonable to balance the needs of large IP holders - who should be encouraged to do restoration and preservation on the IP they own and letting the commons do those things when there is no viable market for those properties.
I may have a copy of the proceedings from ca. 1982. At the time I was a copy editor, and knew somebody who ran the copy editing for AFIPS and gave me some work. I had thought that the owning societies pulled the plug on the National Computer Conference and AFIPS somewhat earlier than 1990.