Quote:
Originally Posted by gmw
One of the things I have tried to say, but not well, is that it seems to me that what we actually own - regardless of the property type - is a set of rights.
...
It is the abstract nature of ownership and ownership rights (the law) that makes all property (in the sense used by law and commerce) so similar (but still not identical, since the reason for law to define rights will vary with the nature of the thing).
|
Exactly! I think you said it quite well! This is why it seems to me that the best counter-argument to those in favour of perpetual copyright would be to have everyone understand and agree on the fundamental abuses and loopholes that such an idea would have in the legislative process. We have centuries of experience and legal precedent in the field of property rights law. That's how we know that the situation is not as simple as some claim it is.
I've tried repeatedly to stress such practical points, to no avail. It appears that adherents of perpetual copyright do not care if their principles are actually practical or enforceable in anu just manner. While it's certainly much easier to repeat
I made it, it's mine, end of story, everything else can be done through laws, that doesn't magically make perfect sense, nor does it resolve any practical issues. Good intentions do not necessarily make good laws.