Quote:
Originally Posted by tompe
I do not see how this is irrelevant.
|
Uhh.. it's the (unauthorized) distribution that copyright makes illegal, not the thinking, memorizing or usually even the actual reproduction. If you're truly claiming that copyright differentiates between different ways in which the distributed artifact was created then please provide some support for those claims.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tompe
You have not done something with the physical property that you was not allowed to to.
|
Yes, I have. I have sold it. Were it not for copyright I would have been allowed to trade the physical object containing the information in question, but copyright limits this central part of natural property rights.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tompe
And since copyright according to you only limited what you could do with physical objects (since you occluded ideas) then I do not see how my point is irrelevant.
|
Copyright is not limited to what you could do with physical objects, according to me. (Copyright is an incursion into physical property rights, but it certainly also limits some non-physical things.)