Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
Can't be done. The copyright holder has the absolute right to grant the right to copy to whomsoever, and with whatever restrictions, they wish. If they decide to grant me the right to only sell their book to people called "Smith", then that is absolutely their right. It's completely irrelevant whether or not you, me, or anyone else agrees with their decision or thinks that they're completely nuts.
|
Just because something is now, doesn't mean that is the way it will be for all eternity. In the US especially, copyright is a deal between the copyright holder and the government granting the copyright holder exclusive rights to copying a work for a limited time for the purpose of encouraging the arts and sciences. Copyright holders are dependent on the government for the enforcement of those rights. Copyright holders who abuse those rights, such as only selling to people named "Smith", will find over time that the rights may be revoked. It's not an inalienable right, nor is it property. The pendulum has swung far to the side of copyright holders. It really won't take much for the pendulum to start to swing back.
People don't understand the archaic business models that led to geographical restrictions. That business model makes less and less sense given the easy that one can buy things world wide today. Just last weekend, I bought several high quality recordings from a vendor in Sweden even though I live in the US, something that would have been very unlikely even 20 years ago. Given how easy it is to buy pass such restrictions for those who want to, I don't see those restrictions lasting a whole lot longer. We are already seeing the cracks.