Re: copyright expiration as a spur to creativity

From: Dan L Burk <BURKDANL[_at_]shu.edu>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 19:40:39 -0400

On 8/13/98, Albert Henderson <noblestation[_at_]compuserve.com> wrote:
>
> On 11 Aug 1998, Dan L. Burk <burkdanl[_at_]shu.edu> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 8 Aug 1998, Albert Henderson <noblestation[_at_]compuserve.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > You seem to say that publishing and production of dramatic works
> > > are not useful arts.
> >
> > Constitutionally speaking, they probably aren't, since the
> > founders stated their intent to promote the progress of science and
> > the useful arts by securing rights to authors and inventors.
> > Publishers and distributors aren't mentioned.
>
> I think publishers and distributors have just been Borked.
>
> So all those not mentioned in the Constitution, according to you,
> are out of luck?

You continue to display a remarkable talent for creative interpretation of others' statements.

The constitutional text relates "useful arts" to the efforts of authors and inventors. This says nothing about whether or not publishers and distributors may or may not be useful in other contexts, only that they are not addressed in the context under discussion.

---

Dan L. Burk
Seton Hall University
burkdanl[_at_]shu.edu

---

Received on Sat Aug 15 1998 - 22:09:05 GMT