Actually, in pointing out that "property" doesn't mean a Procrustean bed to which people's actions must fit, you've strengthened the case that copyright is in fact a form of property. The argument that there can't be intellectual property because it doesn't fit exactly the same model as physical property is based on the assumption that property rights are a preordained system of claims that suits all situations.
Just as the situations were different in England and in early America, the situation isn't identical in owning a house, owning a share of stock, and owning a book that you wrote. It's the general principle which is common -- that in some way, you have legitimately invested resources, such as time, effort, and capital, in the acquisition or creation of the thing in question. Because of this, others may not legitimately act as if it were just something up for grabs. The details and boundaries are necessarily different in each case, and in the same type of property under different situations.
Tim Lee
· 1 year ago
Gary, no disagreement here!
eee_eff
· 1 year ago
You might believe (as do I) that file sharing is unethical, just as many people believed that squatting was unethical. But at some point, Congress has no choice but to recognize the realities on the ground, just as it did with real property in the 19th century.
Yes that's quite true, however getting to the point that Congress realizes the inevitability of a new copyright law may be very messy. Note especially the proposals to increase the penalties for copyright violations.
All Comments
Just as the situations were different in England and in early America, the situation isn't identical in owning a house, owning a share of stock, and owning a book that you wrote. It's the general principle which is common -- that in some way, you have legitimately invested resources, such as time, effort, and capital, in the acquisition or creation of the thing in question. Because of this, others may not legitimately act as if it were just something up for grabs. The details and boundaries are necessarily different in each case, and in the same type of property under different situations.
Yes that's quite true, however getting to the point that Congress realizes the inevitability of a new copyright law may be very messy. Note especially the proposals to increase the penalties for copyright violations.
What are they smoking?
Let's just make the US Govt a division of the RIAA