Quote:
Originally Posted by tubemonkey
To me, property is property; whether it's real, personal, intellectual, or whatever. I think ownership of said property should all be treated the same.
If an author's estate loses ownership of his works 70 years after his death, then a farmer's estate should lose ownership of his farm 70 years after his death.
Any law that extends copyright is therefore a good thing.
|
Should the same apply to patents?
Should the Whitney family still have a monopoly on the cotton gin? Should we get rid of all those generic drugs whose patents have expired that are now being produced inexpensively to treat cancers and other diseases?
How about the intellectual property of all those scientists and mathematicians who currently get no rights to their intellectual property?
After all, isn't it just wrong that Newton's family is not profiting for his contribution of calculus? I mean every time a public performance of "Happy Birthday" occurs the descendants of that little tune's author is entitled to compensation. Newton's kin deserves compensation as well. Right?
How about political ideas?
Shouldn't the individuals responsible for coming up with unique thoughts be guaranteed some kind of monopoly on this intellectual property. I mean if they were the first to have a unique idea then others shouldn't be allowed to copy these ideas without recompense.
Maybe a world of "intellectual property" sounds good to you, but I'm not a big fan. I just don't see "intellectual property" as being the same thing as "physical property". I'm all for laws that encourage creation of arts, sciences, inventions, etc. However, treating it, or even viewing it, the same as
actual property is a mistake.
Of course this is all just my opinion, and I realize there are quite a few people out there that see things similar to how you see them.