Quote:
Originally Posted by wizwor
I didn't vote for that, but I see your point -- Public Libraries are Taxpayer Funded Government Sanctioned Pirates.
|
I'm not entirely sure whether you agree with his point or are simply summarising your understanding of it. I personally disagree, on the basis that the statement is correct only from a viewpoint of unlimited entitlement to "rights holders", (who may be the creators of the works concerned but more often are not). Intellectual Property Law creates a Statutory Monopoly, an exception to the stated aim of many governments to foster competition and the prevailing theory that competition generally is in the Public Interest. It is a justified exception for the overall public good, though I believe that the current framework goes too far, protects the wrong people and is becoming ever more distorted as vested interests lobby for ever more draconian legislation to preserve an obsolete and ultimately doomed business model.
Author as a profession, a way of making a living, would likely not exist but for copyright laws. This privilege, the statutory monopoly, is granted because governments accept that the overall public interest outweighs the disadvantages of its anti-competitive nature. This is why it is not appropriate to view public libraries in this way. Their existence is part of the quid pro quo for the very valuable benefits conferred by intellectual property laws, and themselves part of the balancing of the competing interests involved.