|
| New here? Jump in... | X |
Click the links below any post to see top
Supports
, Counterarguments
, and Comments
to it.
| Boost posts you think are good. This will increase their scores and help them move up. |
|
Click
Add Response
beneath any post to join the debate on it yourself and shed more light.
Spread the word and invite friends or groups—to get support, to challenge and convince, or just to share.
|
|
Assertion:
Copyright should last forever.
In reference to: Against Perpetual Copyright (at the Lessig Wiki)
Essay and/or background: In an essay published in the New York Times on May 20, Mark Helprin argued that copyright should last forever. He equated intellectual property with physical property. In response the piece, several people over at The Lessig Wiki put together a page refuting the thesis. Here, I've attempted to capture those arguments and hopefully people can build off it. It might also serve as a nicely organized reference for showing people who aren't familiar with the debate a new perspective.
Cruxes...
The top point in support right now is, "Time-limiting rights of copyright owners is morally equivalent to doing that to owners of physical property."
[Jump]
The top counterargument is, "Copyright should only last long enough to provide incentive for creation, since the ultimate purpose is to benefit society be enriching culture."
[Jump]
To view all the other arguments on both sides, and delve into the responses to them, just scroll down!
Points
12
0 people have reported this post.
To report it, login first.Jun 14 2007
nobody3
Communities
Sites
Support 1
0 people have reported this post.
To report it, login first.
6
Jun 14
2007
nobody3
Time-limiting rights of copyright owners is morally equivalent to doing that to owners of physical property.
Counterarguments
0 people have reported this post.
To report it, login first.
7
Jun 14
2007
nobody3
Physical property is a finite resource and zero-sum (only one person can have it) -- those aren't true for nonphysical things.
Support 2
0 people have reported this post.
To report it, login first.
6
Jun 14
2007
nobody3
Authors, painters, etc. need to be able to make a living from their creative works, which copyright enables.
Counterarguments
0 people have reported this post.
To report it, login first.
5
Jun 14
2007
nobody4
They made a living all through history without perpetual copyright.
0 people have reported this post.
To report it, login first.
4
Jun 14
2007
nobody4
Copyright's main purpose is not to enable the creator to make money, but to by so doing motivate creation that improves society.
0 people have reported this post.
To report it, login first.
2
Oct 13
2008
Josh
Copyright also limits artists, by restricting the creation of derivative works which may have as much value as the works which inspired them.
A fresh post:
(Boost this post if you think it is a good argument, even if you don't agree with it.)
Support 3
0 people have reported this post.
To report it, login first.
2
Jun 14
2007
nobody3
When works come out from copyright, it transfers wealth from the families of authors to big publishers.
0 people have reported this post.
To report it, login first.
2
Jun 14
2007
nobody3
Confiscation of property is not fair.
Representation
Represented Sites:
Represented Communities:
Challenged / Invited
Invite more people/groups using the field at the top of this page.
Share
Context
< We're here now:
Copyright should last forever.