Under what entitlement would the public have in owning something they did not create? If I build a chair... and I don't want my chair anymore, I have to give it to somebody????

Sometimes I think interest is more important than private interest. Like, should Lord of the Rings copyright belongs to companies and Tolkien descendents forever or should they, eventually, become public property? 

This not a matter of discussion. Laws have long ago settled books like that will become public domain once the license expires 

I have no idea what was settled for games though because I believe the copyright belongs to companies and not creators and a company can survive for centuries. I don't think games should remain private property forever though and must become public eventually 

But alas, this is a pretty big discussion. I have no background in laws to elaborate a solid position here 

I read about it briefly yesterday, it seems said license is 95 years.  So.....  at some point it will be public, but not in my lifetime.  

Personally I think Tolken copy right belongs to the family until they decide to sell it.  It can be theirs forever.  It is their property.  I don't know how old Mickey Mouse is, but it still makes money for Disney.  It wouldn't be right to steal their property just because somebody wants it.  How old is Coca Cola?  Should Coke be stripped of their money making cow?    

Under what entitlement would the public have in owning something they did not create? If I build a chair... and I don't want my chair anymore, I have to give it to somebody????

Sometimes I think interest is more important than private interest. Like, should Lord of the Rings copyright belongs to companies and Tolkien descendents forever or should they, eventually, become public property? 

This not a matter of discussion. Laws have long ago settled books like that will become public domain once the license expires 

I have no idea what was settled for games though because I believe the copyright belongs to companies and not creators and a company can survive for centuries. I don't think games should remain private property forever though and must become public eventually 

But alas, this is a pretty big discussion. I have no background in laws to elaborate a solid position here 

Disney can still making use of Mickey character even if their very first movies become public property 

The point of culture pieces becoming public is to recognize them as piece of arts where their cultural and historical values offset their economical value. Public domain artwork is great because can be freely used for educational and recreational purposes. Not everything must be subject of capitalism, there are more important things in society than providing infinite money for privileged people who just have the luck to born in the families as past artists. I personally couldn't care less if JK Rowlling great-great-great-great children won't profit from her work

For once, most of theatrical plays are based on public domain plays. Imagine how dreadful would be the state of Theater as a art field if there was no public domain stories and they absolutely need to pay copyrights for children plays on high school? 

And this is not an issue. Like... at all. Do you think every painting ever made in humanity History is preserved in some way? Any obscure movie ever recorded in academic spaces or even domestic productions? Every piece of poetry ever written? 

Why pursue to build such insane archive with every piece of gaming ever commercialy released? Do you have any idea of how many games are made every day for tech students and released on Mobile stores? Do you need to preserve them as well?

There are pieces of gaming that have historical and cultural importance, some have significance because they introduce some design concepts that can be used in future 

But the point is we aren't losing knowledge of how to make games. Knowledge is preserved, technology skills are preserved, modern games inherit the concepts of older relevant games and that's all. We don't need to keep the bits of everything. I understand the concern with older relevant rooms from the 70's and the 80's that might be relevant and are being lost, got it. But modern games? They definitely don't need any kind of expensive protection 

Indeed this game preservation nonsense is nothing but a buzzword for companies to profit over older games. It's to create a perceived monetary value of importance based on historical value which is somewhat how other piece of arts get more value with time. Is something Nintendo realized during seventh gen and other companies ignored for so long: Console gamers are slowly approaching the 40-50 years old demographic 

What does it mean? Well, let's say boomers have a tendency to think older = better to pretty much everything, now it's gen X who is approaching the second half of their lifes and they are starting to repeating Boomers behavior, their preferences for games are no exception

To exploit the feelings of nostalgia and remind their golden years of childhood they need to ensure past games can still run and play alright  that's why they are finally developing those emulation teams to make older games playable again, with some fees and costs of course 

Off-topic. Anecdotal, but I find very interesting using this forum because people here are, in average, older than most of my gaming circle (who are basically people from 16 to 24). You guys help me to give perspective people from my generation and younger than me absolutely don't share. People of my age would never, ever, think not playing an online game ever again to be a concern. 

Under what entitlement would the public have in owning something they did not create? If I build a chair... and I don't want my chair anymore, I have to give it to somebody????