Quote:
Originally Posted by gmw
I assumed you would be familiar with Richard Stallman's arguments since they are pretty much identical to yours - right down to saying "its use was and is promoted by those who gain from this confusion". See Wikipedia on Intellectual Property: Criticisms.
What do you think the government granted monopoly is about if not business/financial?
The OED says of monopoly: "Exclusive possession of the trade in some article of merchandise". See that "trade" in there? You know, trade as in business, as in buy and sell stuff, generally with money. That's why the financial definitions are central to this argument, because this has always been about money. ( Of course, you may prefer to make up your own definition, since you don't seem to like any of the ones I've been giving.  )
I am not calling copyright "property" on a whim, and I have proved that I am not making this up. Other than a few dissenters noted in the criticisms link above, it is common to refer to copyright and other rights as property, most especially in financial circles. It common enough that even general dictionary definitions at least allow for such intangibles. |
By your definition, copyright is property. But what kind of property?
A wasting asset.
The world is full of property that are are wasting assets. A mortgage is a wasting asset - to the person who lent the money. Leases are wasting assets. Labor contracts are wasting assets.
Anything agreed to by two parties that has a time period embedded in it, and can be traded in any shape, form, or fashion, are wasting assets.
Why is the concept of a wasting asset so hard to get across here?