Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8
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.
|
Will you please define property?
Yes a book is property.
Intellectual property. So art you saying that an author or their estate should give their property away because it might benefit the public? And that the estate shouldn't benefit
Well in that case, a residence could benefit the public.
Should one give their property away to benefit someone else?
Books are no different from a house.
But you do not see a house being given away because the owner died.
But you are saying that someone's hard work should be given away because they are dead.