Quote:
Originally Posted by axel77
How exactly is it possible to own a cow? Property is an socially enforced exclusion of options of acting. When I "own" a cow, your option to milk it is excluded. When I own an apartment, everyone else is exculded to enter it, except at my allowness.
So whats so different to copyright? Of course you can copy texts just as you can milk that cow that I used to cater for. However there are social rules that exclude you to do so. Therefor in principle it are the same principles at work. I know, that "ideas" are not "used up" like a cow, that can only be milked once in a day, and yes this makes a subtle difference, but it does not change the principle idea at work as it is.
Copyright is not a "new" idea, in fact its just that the ideas of property rights used by say a few thousand years (aprox. beginning with the neolithic age) were extended to intangible things. If this was a good idea or not, can be discussed at least it is compatible to the way the rest of our society works, and at least so far it can be said, *in principle* copyright is the "extension" of the idea of property.
|
Right.
But I think there is a huge difference between putting somebody in charge and complete ownership of an apartment (mankind can live without entering my house), and to put him in charge and ownership of an idea (mankind wouldn't be the same if Homer had copyright and prevented everybody from reading the Odyssey....).So the Odyssey is Homer's complete property until he's living, and it's mankind's property at his death.
That's fair enough to make Homer live from his work, and the whole mankind to develop civilization and education.
