Lawrence Lessig
Lawrence Lessig
Lester Lawrence "Larry" Lessig IIIis an American academic, attorney, and political activist. He is the Roy L. Furman Professor of Law at Harvard Law School and the former director of the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard University. Lessig was a candidate for the Democratic Party's nomination for President of the United States in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, but withdrew before the primaries...
NationalityAmerican
ProfessionEntrepreneur
Date of Birth3 June 1961
CountryUnited States of America
I think if the copyright regime focuses on the people we are supposed to be helping, the artists and creators, and builds a system that gives them the freedom to choose and to protect and to be rewarded for their creativity, then we will have the right focus.
While appropriation art is critical to art, it's an ambiguous art form in the world of the Supreme Court.
Creation always involves building upon something else. There is no art that doesn't reuse. And there will be less art if every reuse is taxed by the appropriator.
A free culture is not a culture without property; it is not a culture in which artists don't get paid.
Distinguished Chinese works can also be more easily accessed by the world.
don't really want the court to stop the new technology. Then, like now, they simply want to be paid for the innovations of someone else. Then, like now, the content owners ought to lose.
We have built upon the 'all rights reserved' concept of traditional copyright to offer a voluntary 'some rights reserved' approach.
This shift is bizarre, ... If welfare recipients can be denied their benefits because they fail to complete a benefits form properly, then I can't see the unfairness in requiring those who demand state support to defend their monopoly similarly by filling out a registration form.
The real harm of term extension comes not from these famous works. The real harm is to the works that are not famous, not commercially exploited, and no longer available as a result.
As we've seen, our constitutional system requires limits on copyright as a way to assure that copyright holders do not too heavily influence the development and distribution of our culture.
When government disappears, it's not as if paradise will take its place. When governments are gone, other interests will take their place.
We adopt this strategy now because there's an urgency to this debate. Over time, the space of free expression has shrunk.
What you want to do is to get a kind of revenue that right now you don't get at all,
Legislation needs a better reason than that lawyers like it, and that America does it.