Quote:
Originally Posted by Iphinome
riemann42 it's a monopoly no two ways about it. Should have have been time limited, now in effect it isn't. Why should an author have the right to chose a publisher to have exclusive rights for 150 years?
|
Ahh. Copyright time limit is certainly an issue, and in the case of current US Law, certainly falls under the abusive acts discussed in (5). Certainly if an artist, his/her spouse, and children are all dead it make little sense.
Monopoly, however, makes very little sense as a concept when discussing art. It is technically applicable, but it is certainly not a bad thing, so it is at best misleading to discuss compensation for art in these terms. Indeed, I think copyright makes very little sense as well, other than a means of enforcing an artists desire, and creating a legal framework to allow artists to charge for their works without fear of theft.
I prefer to discuss these things in the following terms: I enjoy art. I want artists to produce art. I don't want crap art. I pay artists for their work. I pay good (and frankly prolific) artists more. People who do not pay for art clearly like art, but not well enough to support artists, or at least not well enough to support good artists. Copyright and harping on legal rights ignores the moral responsibilities of all parties involved.
The producers of LimeWire and Torrent Sites are scum. They hate art and artists, and pretend like they believe the exact opposite.