Re: Re: Kelly v. Arriba Soft (new opinion from 9thCir.)

• Original Message ----- From: "Keith Handley" <kehandley89[_at_]alumni.amherst.edu> To: "CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property" <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org> Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 4:55 PM Subject: [CNI-(C)] Re: Kelly v. Arriba Soft (new opinion from 9thCir.)

>
> > and consider them in a context that makes sense to YOUR livelihood.
Would
> > you mind if someone went to your employer and offered to do your job for
> > free? If you own a restaurant, would you mind if the city council and
the
> > churches in town decided it would be good for tourism and church coffers
if
> > there were a perpetual food festival set up on the sidewalk right
outside
> > your establishment? If you are a doctor, would you mind if pharmacists
claim
> > the right to write prescriptions for free so patients don't have to
visit a
> > doctor for simple prescriptions?
>
> You've just described a world (except for the city council part)
> that I'd love to live in. Sure, I'd be chagrinned when my employer
> said he was letting me go because someone else was going to undercut
> me on salary, but I'd ask my employer to consider the quality of work
> he's getting for free.

Here is where Keith misses the whole point of copyright. The problem is that there is NO QUALITY issue, because copying is EXACT. Hence, nobody is going to PAY for a work if they are legally allowed to get it for free. That goes for graphics images, books, music, etc. Copyright gives the person who did the intellectual labor some ability to control his work, and gain some monetary value for it. Why would somebody hire Linda for her work if they could take it without consequences?

-Bodi Received on Tue Oct 07 2003 - 23:55:10 GMT