.webp) |
| Check out Harvey's Book Site On May 31st, 2015, I announced here that this book, Justice in the Round was going to be featured for the next week... One of the pictures I used was not used as a header for some reason--it was a picture during the Civil Rights Movement...It was still a problem even, as now, it's worse... Check it out if you haven't read the book--or consider as a review and comparison of today's world... many excerpts |
“Justice always knows injustice.”
The Case for Permanent Copyrights
Protecting Creators for Eternity
Harold Michael Harvey
Sep 02, 2025
 |
| Photo by Ron Lach on Pexels.com |
Copyright law was initially designed to strike a balance between rewarding creators for their work and allowing the public to use those works in the long term freely. However, in an age where creative output is more valuable than ever—both culturally and economically—the expiration of copyrights can undermine the very people who brought these works into existence. Making copyrights permanent for creators would ensure that their intellectual property remains theirs forever, safeguarding both their legacy and their livelihood.
At its core, copyright is about recognizing and protecting the moral rights of creators. A painting, novel, song, or film is not just a product—it is an extension of the creator’s identity, skill, and vision.
Permanent ownership respects the principle that a creator’s work is inseparable from their authorship.
Just as physical property rights do not expire after a set number of years, intellectual property should remain under the control of its originator indefinitely.
If we accept that an artist’s work is a part of their personal legacy, then allowing it to fall into the public domain without their consent is akin to stripping them of a piece of themselves.
Creative works often continue to generate revenue long after their initial release. Under current laws, these profits can eventually be claimed by corporations, publishers, or anyone who exploits the work once it enters the public domain—while the creator’s descendants receive nothing.
Permanent copyright ensures that the financial benefits of a work remain with the creator’s family or chosen heirs.
This is especially important for creators who may have struggled financially during their lifetime but whose work gains value after their death.
In other words, the fruits of a creator’s labor should not be redistributed to strangers simply because time has passed.
When works enter the public domain, they can be altered, repurposed, or commercialized in ways that distort the creator’s original vision.
Permanent copyright would give creators (or their estates) the ability to approve or reject derivative works that might misrepresent their intent.
This protects cultural heritage from being diluted or misused for purposes the creator would have opposed.
For example, without such protections, a profoundly personal novel could be turned into a parody or advertisement without any regard for the author’s wishes.
In today’s digital economy, where content can be copied and distributed instantly, creators face unprecedented challenges in protecting their work.
Knowing that their rights will never expire could encourage more people to invest time, money, and effort into producing high-quality, original works.
Permanent copyright would send a clear message: society values and protects the contributions of its artists, inventors, and thinkers for the long haul.
Critics argue that the public domain fosters creativity by enabling others to build upon existing works. While this is true, it does not require stripping creators of their rights.
Licensing systems can allow for creative reinterpretations while still compensating the original creator or their heirs.
This approach strikes a balance between cultural growth and respect for the originator’s ownership.
Permanent copyright is not about stifling culture—it’s about honoring the people who shape it. By granting creators eternal control over their intellectual property, we affirm that their contributions are not disposable commodities but enduring legacies. In a world where creative works can live forever in digital form, it is only fair that the rights of their creators live forever as well.
~~~
This article has previously been published on Harold’s Substack, a reader-supported publication. Find him there, on LinkedIn and other sites across the Internet...
I wholeheartedly support Michael's proposal and believe that writers should be working together to ensure necessary protection. But there are a few things that I've discovered and want to highlight.
Publishing a book through a publishing company may affect your ownership of the material, once printed. This is a cautionary statement as I don't know the present contract laws. I do know that, within my period working with both publishers and authors, that a writer may actually have to buy long-term ownership back from the publisher. PLEASE BE SURE TO CHECK OUT CONTRACT BEFORE YOU PUBLISH.
Of course, self-publishing has helped to some extent, but never depend on anything... I have read many books where an editor was hired who did not do their job. In one case, the books were so bad that I volunteered to proofread them again as part of my work as a reviewer...
In another case, I explained that in my review I would be discussing the poor editing and the author had not even reread the book as published, thinking that it would be done correctly. I volunteered to write up a statement of what I discovered for the writer, who then used it demand a correction/reprint of the book.
Another time, I was working with a writer who was ready to publish and after reviewing the proofreading the book, I agreed. However, she had NO IDEA of the publishing process. She started talking to other publishers, and really got the whole situation screwed up... Can't remember the details, but just know that the author MUST take full responsibility for each and every book. There is no ability to blame anybody else because the author is required to sign off on each phase... A sad finish, I agreed to review a book that had a beautiful cover and title. I was anxious to start reading. It was so bad that I knew it had not been checked in any way for grammar or errors. I notified her directly rather than through her site and explained. She asked me not to review the book. I still have the book, however, and every once in a while, I pick it up and point out a few more errors that need to be corrected for a complete reprint...
These are just a few. People claim they are editors, but never read the book, instead using grammar and spellcheck... If you do not know that these are tools, not correctors the computer does automatically, then you will get a lousy editing... Only content--actually reading the book being edited--can ensure all errors are discovered and corrected. Everybody makes mistakes, but it is the writer who gets the "credit." I still, when I refer people to a previous review, reread and verify everything is still in good shape. I've removed videos, etc. and updated...
You see, I decided, for this blog, that I wanted each writer to be able to actually use my reviews as needed for marketing. At the bottom of this blog, I have a statement that while this is copyrighted for the purposes of saving the blog in my name, any materials can be copied as long as a reference is made back to the blog... This is the basis upon which I now use, with the author's permission, material that is worthy to be shared further, including across the world here at Book Readers Heaven...
A final note, I do not support AI for writing. It creates a difference in the skills, creativity, and enjoyment of books, especially fiction. I guarantee you that it will be at least a thousand years before a computer can adequately create a thriller in words... It also may ultimately create a financial edge which, in my opinion, will be a problem for every writer who works carefully to ensure that every single word moves the story that he/she is creating forward...NOT anything artificial...
And, then, of course, there is the issue of ghostwriting. When one man can claim he wrote a book(s) written by somebody else, and never reads... But that's on another page...
Thank You, Michael, for placing this important issue before the writing and publishing world!
GABixlerReviews
And Finally, Velshi's Banned Book Club
And Sneak Preview of New Book
No comments:
Post a Comment