Re: GNU License and Computer Break Ins
Henning Makholm writes:
> Scripsit Seth David Schoen <schoen@loyalty.org>
>
> > I'm working on the argument that copyrights are so confusing because
> > they are really an attempt at a government subsidy to authors (to
> > promote the Progress, etc.), cleverly disguised as a minor market
> > regulation.
>
> Hum? I've always thought that was quite clearly and openly the
> official rationale behind the entire "intellectual property"
> concept.
>
> The extent to which this official rational is merely a front for
> the publishing industry's lobbyism is an open question, but I
> happen to think it's a rather good rationale as long as we're
> talking about the literary and artistic works copyright was
> concieved for.
I didn't mean "cleverly disguised" in the sense that the copyright
industries had captured these regulations and were hiding their true
purpose. I meant that the copyright subsidies are not structured as
direct payments to authors, but leave the outward appearance of a free
and competitive market in their works.
"Cleverly disguised" here was a figure of speech, not an attribution
of evil conspiracies to the copyright industries.
The subsidy rationale is apparent enough historically, _but_ plenty of
people have stopped talking about "incentive" and begun talking about
"ownership". That has some pretty serious consequences, at least
conceptually.
--
Seth David Schoen <schoen@loyalty.org> | And do not say, I will study when I
Temp. http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/ | have leisure; for perhaps you will
down: http://www.loyalty.org/ (CAF) | not have leisure. -- Pirke Avot 2:5
Reply to: