View Single Post
Old 12-27-2009, 11:37 AM   #88
LazyScot
DSil
LazyScot ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.LazyScot ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.LazyScot ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.LazyScot ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.LazyScot ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.LazyScot ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.LazyScot ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.LazyScot ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.LazyScot ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.LazyScot ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.LazyScot ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
LazyScot's Avatar
 
Posts: 3,201
Karma: 6895096
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hants, UK
Device: Kindle, Cybook
Some quotes (that I should point out are furnished by my Better Half's research, and not my own!):

PREFACE, p. 7:
Quote:
“THE rights of Property are dear to every man. While Authors have the common feelings of men, it cannot be expected that they should be indifferent to these rights./Since an Author has the same wants with other men, why should he not have the same means of supplying them, and the same prospect of success?/MRS. MACAULAY, in her late spirited Apology for Authors, has shown that they may receive the profitable as well as honorary fruits of their labour, without any degredation of their character. It is the design of this publication to pursue the subject still farther, and show, that Authors have a natural right to these fruits, and a reasonable claim to protection from the state in the enjoyment of them./IF the principles here advanced be just, it may be expected from the wisdom and equity of the British legislature, that the temporary security which is now given to Authors, will hereafter be improved into a legal establishment of perpetual Copy-right./ESTO PERPETUA!”
*** p. 11:
Quote:
“Literary property doth not consist in the exclusive possession of the books in which a composition is written or printed, but in the exclusive possession of the composition itself. This is indeed a kind of property invisible and untangible, but it is not on that account the less real.”
p. 49:
Quote:
“ … authors … are seldom able to make any considerable addition to their fortunes by the sale of their works, but are often so poorly indemnified for their labour, as to be obliged to give up the execution of noble and useful designs.”
p. 51:
Quote:
“The right of authors to the exclusive possession of their own works is founded in nature; and unless any sufficient cause appears for depriving them of it, ought to be secured and guarded by law.”
These are all from William Enfield, in “Observations on Literary Property”, printed in 1774. Yes, 1774. (Sadly, as far as I can find out, it's not been Gutenberg'd yet -- and we don't have our own copy.)

When first created there were debates about the duration, but the idea of the abstract form, that I guess the e-book is the currently ulimate representation, was at the heart of the debate. And there were plenty of pirates around then -- if I remember correctly, as far as London was concerned many of them where Scottish.
LazyScot is offline   Reply With Quote