Copyright Reform: Corporate Entity status for the Nuclear Family Unit?

[Brian]

I would like to know how beneficial or detrimental it would be to change copyright law so that:

1) A Family Unit holds similar protections, privileges, rights, and duties as a Private Corporate Entity.
2) Works prepared for, by, and of such family members would be considered a corporate work, and by extension, the rights to such media would be collectively owned by all family members inside the nuclear family or extended family.
3) Definition of Extended Family is considered the Nuclear Family *plus* one generation up, down, left, or right.
[GrandFather, GrandMother, Father, Mother, Grandson, GrandDaughter, Great Aunt, Aunt, Great Uncle, Uncle, nephew, niece, & cousin.]


____________________________________________________

Fed up with many company policies (Terms of Service) and how that clashes with properly running a family.


Imagine being required to pro-actively keep an archive of family data across multiple local computers AND multiple internet servers **AND** faithfully abide by the terms set forth in cloud data storage providers such as Facebook, Google Drive, SkyDrive, DropBox & etc concerning respecting of an individual's copyright protections.


The current law isn't fit for family members since:
1) Plenty don't fully know or understand copyright law.
2) Know the law BUT don't care about enforcing the law.
3) Don't bother to write down **explicit** permissions for family members in their originally works whether such is a photo, movie, document, or song.
4) Plenty go on an *implied acceptable use policy* (implied rights) concerning media reproduction by family members.
5) Some family members sell off, lose, or destroy their electronics without realizing the importance of the material that they lost because they forgot what they had.

___________________________________________

For goodness sake, families have been functioning as a private corporate group (business entity, LLC, or etc) without official government classification or recognition for maybe hundreds to thousands of years.
Seems that the DMCA's "automatic protection of media w/o requirement of registration" provision is bad for families.

[Mutt]

If you want to treat a family as a single entity for copyright law, then the same will have to be true for contracts, lawsuits, and other legal issues. If your father gets into a car accident that was his fault, then the other person should be allowed to sue the entire family instead of just your father. And if your son takes out a credit and decides not to pay it, your wages would also be garnished to pay it off.

[bcnu]

You have not told us what problem you're trying to solve.

Not clear there is any problem with the current system that requires your "solution". It is perfectly acceptable to ignore copyright infringement of your own relatives or anyone else. If the copyright owners don't care, why should anyone else?

If it's simply a terms of service question, you would take that up with the people writing the terms of service contracts, not the Congress that enacts laws for all possible users.