Quote:
Originally Posted by jgaiser
Which is why the originators of the U.S. Constitution gave the creators a limit right to ownership of their ideas.
Article 1 Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution:
The Congress shall have Power... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
Since you seem to ignore Daithi's list, I'll ask it again.
What about patents? Should Whitney's inheritors still be receiving royalties from the Cotton Gin? Should drug companies receive royalties forever for their drug inventions? How about Bach and Beethoven?
Good luck..
|
The Constitution isn't set in stone; it can be changed.
Patents are trickier because of the ridiculous things they grant them for. Patent law is in need of a drastic overhaul. I support perpetual patents also, but would allow "reasonable variations" that would be free from patent infringement.
Cotton gin? I don't know enough on the specifics to say where a "reasonable variation" would exist; but nonetheless, they would be numerous.
Drugs? Change the molecular structure a bit and you have a new patent for a new drug with similar effects.
What makes "My Sweet Lord" a copyright infringement of "He's So Fine"? I don't hear it and would've tossed the case. To me, this would easily have been a "reasonable variation".