Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8
That would require an alternate definition of the word property. Copying something is an action. Copyright, i.e. the right to copy, is permission to perform a specific act. It's a pretty big legal fiction to consider an action property.
|
Tsk Tsk...clever but wrong. The "Copyright" is the property. The RIGHT to Copy is the property. Not the "action of copying".
"I" wrote "My Book" and I own the Copyright for my lifetime plus 75 years. Nobody else, without my permission (and presumed compensation) may copy my book (except for explicitly listed purposes laid out in the govt' copyright statute).
If you have copied my book, without my permission and or compensation....you have robbed me. Theft of services is still theft.
As it relates to the point of the argument I was making....I view holding "the copyright" to be holding property. It's just that it becomes "not property" after a government defined period of time.
How is it property? It has value. It belongs to me. I can sell or transfer that value to another person. My children can inherit that as well.
It is therefore property.