Quote:
Originally Posted by tompe
Quote:
Originally Posted by msundman
No, it does not. I'm not sure whether you're making wrong inductions or are confusing implication with equivalence, but something wrong is certainly happening in your reasoning.
|
No, I do not think so. What I tried to do was to show that your original statement:
Quote:
Originally Posted by msundman
Copyright is defining what people are forbidden to do with their property, i.e. copyright is an incursion into natural property rights.
|
is wrong if read as a definition of what copyright is. Copyright also forbid what you can do with the content of your memory which I do not consider to be property in the meaning you used the word. |
I was correct, you made an invalid logical induction. It was not a definition of copyright. Specifically, I did
not say that copyright is
only defining what people are forbidden to do with their property. (Copyright certainly also limits things that are not (natural) property, and I'm fully aware of this fact, so I would never say otherwise.)