Perpetual Copyright

In this New York Times article, Mark Helprin presents the case for perpetual copyright.Basically, ownership of property is perpetual - ownership can be transferred, but property is rarely transferred back to the commons. Helprin suggests that a similar concept should apply to intellectual property. The concept of perpetual copyright is not new - it was in fact suggested at the very begining, and for a brief while, perpetual copyright actually existed.

However, intellectual property itself is not like normal property, as it is intangible. It is also used in different form to normal property, and has different characteristics. Firstly, there is no wear and tear in IP, and there is a need to maintain property, to maintain its value. IP is valuable in itself - there is no attached maintainance costs for example.

Secondly, physical property, if fallen into desrepair and left unused, is often recycled and available to the commons. There are means to get rid of ownership of a physical property. IP cannot have perpetual ownership, until there is a means to recover abandoned works without fear of prosecution.

Lastly physical property has a narrow range of uses, morphing physical property to other uses is not easy. However, IP is about the idea - and a design of a house can be morphed to a design of a boat etc.IP is also used differently - you can't really combine physical assets to form new usable physical assets, while retaining the use of the original assets. With IP - you can mix songs and videos to produce something new.

IP and physical property are different types of property. In fact, copyright protection period is too long and need to be shortened; and not the other way around!