Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Leyor
We've established that from a historical viewpoint, that Copyright reduced the authors earnings pr. work and that the high price pr book actually resulted in only one group of people benefiting: Publishers. And that Copyright quelled innovation lessening the amount of original works pr. year. So we don't really need to beat around that bush anymore.
|
Hmmm. Did I miss the part of the discussion where that was all "established?" Or has the definition of the word been changed? There's been some opinions bandied back and forth, but none of the stuff you mentioned in that quote has been "established," that I can see. So as far as I'm concerned... the "bush" still needs some beating before I'm ready to concede that copyright has absolutely no redeeming qualities--as you seem so eager to "establish."
Do I believe that higher priced ebooks are intrinsically virtuous?... No, not at all. But honestly, price isn't an issue for me. I buy it if I can afford it. If I can't afford it... I wait for the price to drop where I
can afford it. Otherwise, I do without. I'm a big boy, I can wait (and patience
is a virtue).
Do I think literary works are protected by copyright for an unnecessary length of time? You bet! It's ridiculous! I'd love to see it shortened--shortened a lot. I'd love to see orphaned works automatically enter the public domain if someone doesn't actively lobby for copyright renewal after a reasonable period of time.
I also think DRM is a horrible tool to try and protect copyright with. But it's also a non-issue for me. I buy an ebook and immediately remove any DRM that comes with it--with a squeaky clean conscience, I might add. I've even lent a few non-loanable ebooks to close personal friends without feeling like a pirate-ous turd.
Abolish copyright completely?? Not on your life. I'm not interested in the eradication of intellectual property as a concept and/or law. Not. At. All.