Replies

First, I look forward to discussing your mark up of those copyright rules at the link.

Secondly...

If it is not me as the original artist/author, but a rightsholding corporation, or one of my ne’er-do-well descendants, even if he has taken up continuing the comic strip after my repose

Did you grant the heir the right to make derivative works ? After your death, your heirs could, I presume, grant themselves the right to make derivative works. They would then have their own copyright on the parts of the derivative works that were of their creation. Those copyrights of the derivative portions would then have their own expiration clock ticking, starting from when they were created.

The original copyrighted work that you did, however, would still be covered by the original copyright. Which will eventually expire. At which point, anyone can create other derivative works based on it, copy it as much as they want, etc.

For that matter, if I’ve had them on the market for 28 years and can’t keep the loyalty of fans against a knock-off, I probably don’t deserve any more money for the idea.

So the huge company should be able to just copy the works of po' little old me and run me into bankruptcy, without me having any legal recourse ?

The original copyrighted work that you did, however, would still be covered by the original copyright. Which will eventually expire. At which point, anyone can create other derivative works based on it, copy it as much as they want, etc. Unless, of course as the expiration date approaches, the copyright is held by an influential corporation that sees value to its bottom line in suppressing derivative works that might compete with its products, in which case it will suborn Congress into abusing its constitutional authority to grant exclusive rights "for a limited term" to extend the term again. You know this has happened, since it's the point at issue with Mickey Mouse.

Do you really want to defend copyright terms longer than the terms of the Law of Queen Anne on the basis that not having it will "run into bankruptcy" those artists who have had only a single profitable idea that they have milked for 28 years and who can't keep the fan base they've developed when competitors start marketing competing derivative works? Really? I refer you to zeugma's posts to this thread. Public domain is the normal state of affairs, copyright an exception we make to encourage art by allow an artist to receive monopoly rents for a limited term. At some point Mickey Mouse should -- indeed should already have -- become like the figure in Botticelli's "The Birth of Venus", something anyone can use in a derivative work, yes, for profit, without having to pay royalties, or be sued.