Re: copyright expiration as a spur to creativity

On 15 Sep 1998, Michael Scarpitti <mscarpit[_at_]asnt.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 14 Sep 1998, Albert Henderson <noblestation[_at_]compuserve.com> wrote:
> >
> > The similarities exist in (A) protection of owners rights by law,
> > (B) investment and return on investment in using those rights
> > to serve the public, (C) response of the public that provides
> > economic benefit to the investors and owners, (D) economic and
> > intangible benefits to the public.
> >
> > The differences of "literary" vs. real property have a bearing
> > only on the application and execution.
>
> I meant similarities in the objects being compared: Department Store
> (RP) and Literary Work (IP).
>
> You have brought up some similarities in how these objects are treated,
> which is not responsive to my point.
>
> Try again, please.

Under the heading, "copyright expiration as a spur to creativity" I have responded appropriately. My accountant refers to "the principle of substance over form" in the analysis of equivalents.

The main difference in substance is that the law secures the rights of the author for a limited time while it protects the owner of Macy's property indefinitely. If protection encourages such useful investment, why is it reasonable to protect interests in real estate and personal property longer than the interest in IP??

Albert Henderson, Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY <70244.1532[_at_]compuserve.com> Received on Thu Sep 17 1998 - 02:01:14 GMT