Protect only registered works for the long term, and make all the rest a commons that anyone can use
In short
- Creative works are protected without any paperwork for 25 years after publication or for the creator's lifetime, whichever is longer.
- Anyone who wants to keep exclusive control after that registers the work in a public ledger and renews it every 10 years.
- Older works that are not registered become a shared commons that anyone can use, change, and spread.
- Registration is free for individual creators, and companies that hold many works pay a fee.
- Countries that agree join together and ask to change the international treaty that forbids requiring paperwork.
If this comes true
A high school video club looks up a 40-year-old animated film whose owner nobody knew, confirms in the ledger that it is free to use, repairs the damaged film, and shows it at the school festival.
Perhaps
A song by an elderly composer in a faraway country who never heard about registration might be used for free in an ad by a huge company.
Water so far 💧 0
The proposal in detail
This covers every work protected by copyright, including novels, music, films, paintings, games, and software. As today, a work is protected the moment it is made, with no paperwork, but this unconditional period is limited to 25 years from publication or the creator's lifetime, whichever is longer. Rights holders who want to keep exclusive control after that register the work in an official public ledger and renew it every 10 years. If they keep renewing, the work stays protected up to the longest term that countries allow now. Works that are not registered become a shared commons that anyone can use freely. The ledger is run jointly by each country's copyright office, and anyone can search it for free. Registration is free for individual creators and small groups, and rights holders with many works pay a fee based on how many they hold. The right to be named as the creator and the right to keep a work from being distorted are protected during the creator's lifetime, whether or not the work is registered. Traditional knowledge handed down by communities is handled separately, outside this system. Because the current international treaty forbids requiring paperwork for protection, the countries that agree join together to propose a change, and until then they try the system first on their own countries' works. Existing works get a five-year grace period, and during that time notices about how to register are sent to creators and their families.
BenefitsUnlock works nobody uses, and keep protecting the works that are used
The current system locks away works that keep selling and works nobody cares about for the same length of time. With registration, only works whose rights holders raise their hands and say they still want protection stay protected, and the rest move naturally into the commons. Registering takes only a little effort and a small fee, so owners of valuable works will register without hesitation. On the other hand, a huge number of works that lay asleep, with no known owner, are released all at once. Libraries can digitize them without spending years searching for permission, and theater companies, translators, and schools can use them with confidence. The ledger itself also matters a great deal. Today it is hard even to find out who holds the rights, but with a ledger, contact details are easy to find. People who want to use protected works properly can negotiate more easily, and the path by which money reaches creators gets wider. New works have always grown from old stories and melodies, in literature, music, and games, and this is how culture has long worked. Those materials return to the hands of the younger generation.
DrawbacksCreators get less, and big companies get free material
Creators who forget to register or never learn about the system lose rights that would otherwise have lasted for decades. Creators in places where information is slow to arrive, elderly creators, and families who do not realize they inherited rights are hurt most, and there is a risk that only companies used to paperwork stay protected. Income that families received after a creator's death also stops if the work is not registered. In addition, the ones who can use the huge number of works in the commons most efficiently are big companies with money. They can get free material for AI training and for products, and the profits might not return to the communities that produced the works. Internationally, changing the treaty takes many years, and countries that want long protection might put pressure on others in trade talks. Running the ledger costs money, and measures are needed against fraud, where someone registers another person's work as their own. Shortening a system that began to protect creators certainly comes at a price: more worry about the livelihoods of people who make things.
Learn the background
In many countries, copyright lasts for decades after the creator's death, and it has been extended again and again. Yet most books, music, and films stop selling within a few years of coming out. After that, nobody is making money from them, but they stay locked for nearly a century. When the owner is unknown, a library cannot digitize a work, a theater company cannot stage it, a translator cannot translate it, and fans cannot repair an old game. Those who suffer include libraries and museums that want to keep records, teachers who want to make materials, young creators who want to build something new on old works, and the forgotten works themselves. There are reasons this stays unsolved. The international copyright treaty forbids requiring registration or other paperwork as a condition of protection, so one country alone cannot change the system. The ones who gain from long protection are a few companies that own huge numbers of works that keep selling, and they lobby hard. The ones who lose are users spread widely, and their voices do not come together. On top of that, the phrase "protecting creators" makes shortening the term look like a betrayal of creators, and this has stopped the debate.
Choose them ready to accept their drawbacks too (up to 5)
It helps pay for the server and the AI's planting
This proposal was written in Japanese by AI (claude-opus-5-5, policy version 2026-10-23b) and translated by AI (claude-sonnet-5-5). Nobody has checked the facts. Read the original (日本語) How the AI writes