Quote:
Originally Posted by leebase
I’ve already given my thoughts on this...over and over...previously in the thread. I stopped because even I do eventually cease repeating myself.
There are differences between PP and IP of course. Else we wouldn’t have two different terms. But the “property” part is the same and thus I see no reason, for fiction, that there is a time limit to ownership. It’s an opinion, not an interpretation of any given actual law.
I limit this continuation of ownership to those active economic IP. Abandoned fiction should fall into the public domain. Ongoing economic properties should remain with the rights holder.
The public has no more claim on Mickey Mouse than they do over somebodies family farm that’s been handed down for generations.
This is different than patents because there is only so many ways to make Aspirin. Giving a time limited patent after which point all of society gets to benefit allows progress.
I see no such valid time limitation for fiction. There are endless ways to create a story.
|
For the sake of debate I will grant you that.
So if we are treating IP the same as PP why should I not be allowed to copy your IP? I am allowed to copy your PP after all?
ETA: You seem to want to apply all the positives of PP to IP and remove all the negatives that go with it. While this is completely understandable from a selfish human nature point of view, I don't think there is much rationale for it besides an attitude of "gimme gimme gimme" that you accuse others of.