Quote:
Originally Posted by tubemonkey
There is no incentive. It's a matter of property rights. Books belong to the copyright holders and it should be up them to determine disposition.
I see no difference between land and books. If land can be passed on generation after generation, then so should books.
|
Just because you can't see a difference doesn't mean there isn't one. I think you would be hard pressed to find any expression of an idea that wasn't a combination of other ideas or an elaboration of other ideas; that's just how it works. Ideas don't just pop fully-formed out of the brain of their creator.
Now, there are a number of academic arguments on whether or not a copyrightable work is property or not, but it's irrelevant; the law treats them as different things. Your entire argument for changing the law seems to rest on the idea that "property" is a sacrosanct thing, that is imbued with magical rights and obligations that somehow transcend property laws. I'm guessing you're also not a big fan of eminent domain.
Edit
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuantumIguana
Words
|
Dammit, I missed your post and then tried to make the same point (but not as well).