Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
I've always been slightly curious why it is that people feel that copyright protection should be somehow "different" from protection for "physical" entities (like widget-making factories). Writing is just as much "real work" as manufacturing widgets - why should one not be able to carry on earning income from such a thing after the death of the originator as one can with any other type of business?
|
In writing one book or manufacturing a single widget, one puts in a certain finite amount of effort. One can only profit a single finite amount from manufacturing a single widget (a large amount if the widget is a sattelite and a small amount if the widget is a shoelace). But if copyright were perpetual, then one could profit and profit and profit forever from a single finite amount of effort.
Of course one can set up a system for perpetual profit out of widget manufacturing: one sets up a corporation that manufactures widgets. But notice that there is continuing work involved--more and more widgets need to be made. But with a perpetual copyright system, one could in theory make money continually with close to zero effort put in for the continuation. (It's true that one has to keep on making copies, but the cost of that, at least in the case of electronic copies, is miniscule.)
By writing a book, one is (sometimes at least) benefiting society. Society pays one for this service by prohibiting others from copying the book for a finite amount of time without one's permission. That seems like a fair price for the service on the average.