Re: "Against Intellectual Property"

On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, Roland J. Cole <cole[_at_]spi.org> wrote:
>
> Linda Gruber's story about cars is entertaining, but I think
> misses two points:
>
> 1. Intangible property, especially intellectual property, is
> different from tangible property. If someone copies a song from
> a CD, the CD as a device is not harmed. Giving cars (or any other
> tangible thing) back is not a close analogy. Now maybe a taxi
> medallion would be closer -- after X years, you can no longer
> charge others for rides in your car, but you get to keep the car
> (and can give people rides for free). But of course that does not
> sound nearly as strong for the point.
>
> 2. The issue is always balance -- I still refer people to the
> Charles Mann article in the Atlantic Monthly (still viewable on
> the magazine's web site). If copyright too long -- you get less
> new stuff (and lots of violation of the rule); if copyright too
> short -- you get too much junk (and less new stuff). It is
> getting the balance right that is important -- arguing that life
> plus 70 is too long is not the same as saying all copyright is bad.

Great points. The problem that I have with extending the copyright to life plus 70 is that the net benefit in terms of "new stuff" is probably close to zero or even negative. Who's going to base publishing decisions on whether the copyright will expire 70 years v. 50 years after they die?

Kevin Grierson
<kgrierson[_at_]wilsav.com> Received on Mon Aug 07 2000 - 00:15:16 GMT