Quote:
Originally Posted by schex86
It was not I who deemed the arts you infer to as of the "non-useful" variety, but the founding fathers, both in the Constitution, and in their denial of copyright protection to those arts in 1790.
|
As you pointed out yourself, the law and the Constitution are two entirely different things.
No where in the Constitution does it explicitly state that useful Arts are confined to "maps & charts, non-fiction books, technical drawings/illustrations, documentaries, software, and architectural designs" or any other such definition that you have deemed worthy of the title.
Hence why the courts have deemed works of fiction, paintings, movies et al, can be and indeed are, covered by copyright.
Cheers,
PKFFW