Re: copyright under stress

On 6/5/2000, David Hale <dhale[_at_]aggt.com> wrote:
>
> If I create something, it is mine, not yours, and not the public's.

I try not to get involved in threads that are little more than theological disputes, but I just wanted to point out what looks like a fundamental error in paradigm.

In general, diaries excepted, when people create an item of copyrightable matter it is for the purpose of communication to one or more third parties. Thus, on the day that, for example, words can truly be taken back, leaving no memory of them, then and only then can their creator consider those words to be his/hers alone.

Communication requires at least two participants. The law presumes that copyright helps facilitate communication by encouraging one of the participants. It may well be that when copyright bolsters one end of a communication to the serious detriment of the other end, the balance can tip and copyright not be worth the candle.

The discussion, therefore, should always be focused on the balance and the goal to be served. Absolutist statements like "it's all MINE" (from either side) accomplish nothing, and in my experience are purely smokescreens behind which lurk economic interests that feel threatened by a franker discussion of qui bonit.

Vance

*Vance R. Koven                       Counselor at Law  *
*              Law Offices of Vance R. Koven            *
*20 Park Plaza, Suite 633              Boston, MA 02116 *
*tel: 617-482-3852                    fax: 617-482-4972 *
*              net: vrkoven[_at_]world.std.com               *
*********************************************************