Re: actuaries and copyright extension

John Noble writes:
>
> I thought that a subsidy was the dedication of a public asset for
> private benefit, while the dedication of a private asset to public
> use was, in other circles, called something else.

     On what ground do you call copyright rights a "private asset"? Without a public statute, there would be no such rights. On what ground is the public required in such a statute to give to the copyright owner more than the benefit the public receives in return?

Dennis S. Karjala
Professor of Law
Arizona State University
Tempe, Arizona 85287
602-965-4010
602-965-2427 (fax)
dennis.karjala[_at_]asu.edu Received on Thu Apr 18 1996 - 18:05:31 GMT