4 ms·
Rather than analogizing copyright to physical property, I find it more useful to consider a strictly consequentialist approach. If we accept the purpose of US
by nitrogen 10y ago
Rather than analogizing copyright to physical property, I find it more useful to consider a strictly consequentialist approach. If we accept the purpose of US copyright is "to promote the progress of science and the useful arts," and we accept that citizens have a right to know the laws they are expected to obey (as part of due process), then we can conclude that any application of copyright that serves to hinder due process ought to be invalid, and that it is the obligation of governments passing laws to obtain and distribute the text of those laws to their citizens freely.
- throwanem 10y agoI don't disagree in the slightest. But that addresses only the specific case in which the text of a copyrighted and privately held document is incorporated by reference into that of a law as passed. Copyright in general is a much broader subject.