Re: Copyright Extension Bill Passes Congress

Jeremy Byrne <jeremy[_at_]iz.org> wrote:
>
> There: see what happens when you give people the impression that they
> own something? They get possessive, and their ambit claims gain
> bravado. Damn good reason for abandoning this troublesome notion
> of copyright altogether! I mean, how much important art would we
> lose, after all?

No, there is an important distinction to be made here. 'These people' do own something. Unfortunately they are mistaken as to what they own. They do not own the work, because such an approach would point towards absolute ownership of the work by the author along with the ability to determine how it is used, and an argument towards perpetual copyright ownership. Authors own the COPYRIGHT rather than the work. Ownership of the copyright allows them to exercise the rights they own as part of the copyright, but not to interfere with others use of their work beyond their rights under the copyright.

Therefore they are 'getting possessive' over the wrong thing. This is a common misconception. However, abolishing copyright as a solution to this is rather like taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut: completely inappropriate.

Ewan J. Kirk

--
Law Research Centre, Southampton Institute
Ewan.J.Kirk[_at_]solent.ac.uk