Quote:
Originally Posted by gmw
This sort of extremism is where I came it. There are more than two choices, you know? It does not have to be one extreme or the other. Things can have some similarity without being identical and without being completely distinct. Is it so hard to see that such middle ground can exist?
|
Firstly, I've already admitted I mis-wrote when I stated they were "not at all comparable."
Yes, they have similarities. Yes they can be compared if one wants to. However, I don't actually see how there are more than two choices in this particular case.
The only argument I have seen in this thread for the idea that copyright should last for eternity is that IP is the same as PP and therefore should be treated the same under the law.
My point in response to that is IP and PP are different and therefore should not be treated the same under the law. That's it. That's all. And the law seems to agree with me on that one since they invented a whole new category of law to deal with IP rather than just sticking it in with PP.
You seem to disagree with that simple premise. I don't mean to be rude but I honestly don't know what to say to that because it seems so obvious to me that IP and PP are actually different. No matter how similar someone believes them to be (which I still contend not much) it still seems obvious to me that anyone should recognise and understand that they are actually different.