On 11/21/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm not sure this reply adequately addresses you point here but let me just point out a related valid concern. It is not a good idea, IMHO, to make points about creative works with analogies to physical property. It gives the impression that creavite works are/(should!) be treated just like physical property. Creative works are not rivalrous. One can share an infinite amount of copies without creator losing anything he didn't have before (except for some artificial monopoly privileges we've come to refer to as copyright).
Aren't you the one making an analogy between creative work and physical property? You're saying that it doesn't matter if we get rid of copyright, because we're not *taking anything away* from the author. What can be taken away but physical property? By excluding the "artificial monopoly privileges" from what you would consider actual taking, you are begging the question (assuming what is to be proved). --Rachel -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
