View Single Post
Old 06-27-2016, 12:56 PM   #228
pwalker8
Grand Sorcerer
pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pwalker8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 7,196
Karma: 70314280
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Device: iPad Pro, iPad mini, Kobo Aura, Amazon paperwhite, Sony PRS-T2
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT View Post
Precisely. Copyright is an asset and can be exploited (or not) in any way that the legatee desires. A copyright holder has an absolute right to choose not to publish a work that they hold the rights to.
You've bought into the idea of ideas as property narrative. Copyright, at least in the US, isn't property, but rather is the exclusive right to copy granted to authors for a limited time in order to promote the progress of science and useful arts. So there are two sides of the bargain. On one side, the author profits from his work. On the other side, the public gains access to that work. Playing dog in the manger hardly advances the arts. I'm pretty sure it isn't possible for an author to profit from his work after he is dead. I'm sympathetic to the idea of that the widow or minor children should get the copyright, but it's not property.

Last edited by pwalker8; 06-27-2016 at 01:04 PM.
pwalker8 is offline   Reply With Quote