RE: Re: limits on copyright

From: Lee, Dan <leed[_at_]u.library.arizona.edu>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 15:45:11 -0500

Jeff -

First of all, I feel a need to point out that your vision of incentives necessary for creation is rather narrow. Financial recompense is but one such motivator. Just as an example, academic creators generally are motivated by achieving the widest possible dissemination of their works.

More important, though, is your mis-characterization of librarians and academics being opposed to copyright protection. As both a librarian and an academic, and rather representative of both, I can say confidently that we are definitely for copyright protection. What we are opposed to are copyright regulations that overly favor content owners. But we are absolutely in favor of balanced copyright laws.

So, you seem to be battling a straw man here.

Dan Lee
University of Arizona

-----Original Message-----

Herb Coleman wrote:
> In reality as soon
> I perceive of the idea I can reproduce it with out having a real effect
> on the original. Likewise we all know of people who have downloaded
> music, picture or text from the internet. The original creators of this
> work still have their originals and the other copies do not diminish
> their property at all.

<<< Herb, I disagree, entirely. To an author/owner of a work, the value of the original expression is directly dependent on the extent to which that value may be exploited. When the work is copied, and when those copies are used or marketed, the copies compete with the original expression, and the value of the original expression is diminished. Without copyright protection, the value of an author's work is diminished, and with it, the ability of the author to receive due consideration for the author's work product. The author is rendered unable to support him/herself through the creation of works, and thus, the incentive to create new works is removed. The author then secures a job working the counter at Blockbuster, earning minimum wage, and has no time or interest in the creation of new works. Wait....Under your scenario, there would be no job at Blockbuster, as there would be no video rental industry, as the ability to distribute, display and broadcast unauthorized copies of films would eliminate the incentive for filmmakers to create films. Writers would have no incentive to write. Schools would then have no new or revised textbooks. And librarians, the very folks who argue against copyright protection, might just be out of a job.

It is amusing to see professors and other academics arguing against copyright protection, while at the same time cashing their paychecks every week. I suggest that anyone who would assert that authors should not have the ability to own and protect their work product should:

(1) Add up all of the compensation that they have ever received for all work that they have ever done, and return the total amount to their employers. (2) Refuse to accept any salary or other compensation for their work, for life.
(3) Donate all of their savings and property to their employer upon their deaths, thereby depriving their heirs of benefiting from a lifetime of work

Jeff Sedlik
Advertising Photographers of America

#############################################################

This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to   the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>. To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org> To postpone your subscription, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-null[_at_]cni.org> Send administrative queries to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>

Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at <https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>. Received on Thu Nov 20 2003 - 01:45:11 GMT