Speaking to technology law podcast OUT-LAW Radio, Zemer said that a fundamental
imbalance needs to be put right between the owners of copyright and
the general public.
"The main argument is that the public does play a major part in
the very process of creating copyrighted material," Zemer said. "I
would share the copyright for the reason that the public plays a
decisive role in the creative process. It provides the framework,
it provides the social, the cultural, the other materials without
which the final product would not have come to existence."
Zemer argues on OUT-LAW Radio and in his recently published book
'The idea of authorship in copyright', that in order to be granted
a monopoly on their content, authors should justify their claims
over their creations.
Zemer believes that authors should be able to apply for five or
10-year copyright licences. A court would decide if an author
deserved such a licence, but the author would have to re-apply at
its expiry.
As a payback, the licences could extend on a rolling basis into
perpetuity, said Zemer, but there is another catch: exemptions to
it could also be limitless.
Exemptions to copyright already exist, for example for libraries
or students who want to make copies of work. Zemer would insist
that a copyright licence would have an open list of exemptions that
could be added to by a court at any time in the future.
Zemer said that his proposal would give the public a share in
material created by artists. He believes that this system would be
a fairer representation of the real relative contributions made by
artists and by society at large.
"There is lots in writing that sees the authors as almighty
creators that create from nothing, from thin air. This has nothing
to do with reality," said Zemer. "Authors themselves say they react
to what they see, and they react to what society and culture has to
offer. Without the public as part of the creative process,
copyright works and authorship would have nothing to offer."
