Only apparently so from one perspective, but really if you think about it copyrights and licenses benefit opposite parties. Copyright benefits the creator-owner. License is a good held through a transaction in which the owner may be compensated but which benefits the licensee (the licensor being the copyright holder, at least generally speaking). Licenses are - and should be - subject to contingencies and conditions, although they can be set up to be irrevocable. But, in any case, having a license expire at the death of the licensor/copyright holder would be beneficial to the copyright holder, presumably, just as much as the rule that the copyright itself does not end at death. Personally, I think that transfers should be allowed for a certain number of times for a purchased file, extending past the death of the owner. But whether or not that's the case should be left to contract, free market competition and antitrust rules.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by David G..
Re: Re:
Only apparently so from one perspective, but really if you think about it copyrights and licenses benefit opposite parties. Copyright benefits the creator-owner. License is a good held through a transaction in which the owner may be compensated but which benefits the licensee (the licensor being the copyright holder, at least generally speaking). Licenses are - and should be - subject to contingencies and conditions, although they can be set up to be irrevocable. But, in any case, having a license expire at the death of the licensor/copyright holder would be beneficial to the copyright holder, presumably, just as much as the rule that the copyright itself does not end at death. Personally, I think that transfers should be allowed for a certain number of times for a purchased file, extending past the death of the owner. But whether or not that's the case should be left to contract, free market competition and antitrust rules.