[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Trenien

I think I'm going to tackle that from your own point of view, that is "property of physical objects is a purely social construct, and as such copyright is fundamentally identical".

That isn't my point of view.

My first postulate is that the concept of property rights is a social construct. Different societies may define it differently, and have different concepts of what may be considered individual property and what rights the property holder is granted over the use of the property.

The second is that copyright can largely be treated as property for the duration of the rights. Property implies ownership and control. Copyrights provide some measure of both over the work they protect for the duration of the copyright.

Supposedly, laws in our modern world reflect what is considered acceptable behavior. An argument could be made against such a statement but I think most will agree that it at least applies to laws that have existed for a long time (and are still in use - let's forget leftovers that haven't been repelled but are considered crazy nowadays).

As I mentioned elsewhere, any human society of necessity evolves rules governing what is acceptable behavior, to insure the smooth functioning of the society. The rules that get written down we call law.

The rules change as the society changes, and new rules get made to cover situations that didn't previously exist. Old rules do tend to stick around, but generally don't matter because they don't get enforced.

If it makes you happier, I'll drop the use of the word "property" from my comments. It's a loaded word and it's getting in the way.

Notwithstanding the "thing" part (using it would be playing semantics), you'll especially pay attention to the "enjoy" part. If you keep that in mind, you'll have to conclude the only way for you to have an idea as your property is to keep it a secret, else anybody else can enjoy it.
Which is pretty much the point of books, I believe.

<sigh> I don't believe it's possible to "own" an idea long term. (And I would be dismayed at any attempt to change the legal rules so it was.) RLauzon's point about an idea still being possessed by the original holder even when shared with someone else is correct. If I come up with an idea and tell it to you, I still have it afterward.

What's at issue is control. If I create a copyrighted work, the copyright assigns me control over the use of that work for a defined period.

Let's say I write a book.

I can attempt to place the book to a publisher, granting the publisher the right to produce and sell an edition of it, in exchange for an agreed upon advance and continuing royalties.

I can attempt to sell the book myself.

I can choose to make it freely available with restrictions on what the people who get it may do with it.

I can explicitly waive all rights and make it available to anyone to do with as they choose.

I can choose not to release the book at all.

The key is that I control it, and I can place legal restrictions on what you may do with it.

What is being debated here is how long that control should last.

Honestly, if life+25 years is your idea of short term, I'm afraid I just can't understand your way of looking at things. I must be too young (and I'm well past my thirtieth birthday).

So am I. Well past.

Is life+25 years my idea of "short term"? No. I never said it was. I said "shorter term" as in "shorter than the one used now". Is it something I can live with? Yes.

How long do you feel it should be, and why? What is the negative effect on you because it isn't the way you would prefer?
______
Dennis