User:Scann/sandbox

Main idea:

up until 2000: most articles refer to theoretical problems/framework problems for the public domain. How it has to be characterized, etc. With changes introduced in law (see i.e. Samuelson on Mapping the Public Domain) or reform proposals (see Miller, Orrin G. Hatch; Eldred v. Ashcroft), the question turns more into "what are the potential effects of a term extension?". No possibility to demonstrate at large scale what the concrete impacts would be on the public domain (mainly narratives and stories, i.e., the "public domain day").

The hook: the NYPL unveils how many books are in the public domain because their copyrights were never renewed.

Changes in the literature: towards a less theoretical, more empirical, evidence-based research (Heald, Giblin, among others). They explore the intersection between theory and empirical research to produce evidence on the impacts of extension.

Remaining questions: how this affects countries where we have conceptions on IP based on natural rights theories? How this affects the Berne Convention (mainly rooted in natural rights conceptions). Despite your theoretical framework, there's a requirement where law still should be evidence based. But we don't know how this is affecting natural rights countries because there's not as much evidence being produced (i.e. Marzetti). Not looking at these issues mean that we're overlooking half the world on the basis of a silly argument (is it really theory the thing that matters?).

Good concepts:

- Categories for the public domain developed in Samuelson and then refined in Greenleaf & Lindsay;

- "underuse hypothesis" in Giblin

The lost thread:

- public domain & GLAMs

- public domain & Google Books

The theoretical frameworks didn't delve much into the questions posed by these projects. So much of the ideas around copyright & PD inside GLAM research might not look to the existing theoretical frameworks (i.e. Samuel Coad ). How do questions on the nature of copyright can actually help to solve some of the pressing issues that these institutions face?

GLAMs shouldn't be copyright police. This is an obvious statement. But in a discussion around how has the power to shape the law this is not a minor issue.