4 ms·

Copyright has become the catch-all kind of intellectual property if nothing more specific is available. It's grotesque what it's become, but that's just how it

• cpach 8y ago
  I agree. Some people seem fond of trying to use copyright as a tool to prevent competition, but of course that’s not at all what it was intended for.
  • mdpopescu 8y ago
    Er... preventing competition and aiding censorship are exactly what it was created for [1] [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licensing_of_the_Press_Act_1662 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licensing_of_the_Press_Act_166... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Anne https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Anne
    • cyborgx7 8y ago
      All discussions on the legitimacy of intellectual property are basically mute until the protection periods go back to something reasonable of at most 20 years.
    • pbhjpbhj 8y ago
      Hmm, the Licensing of the Press Act to me is not copyright, it doesn't prevent copying, it prevents the use of printing presses IIRC. It also addresses sedition. The Statute of Anne includes the deal of provision of copies on deposit to named libraries, and of entry to the public domain; education and availability of publications are specific aims. It provides a reward period of up to 14 years (the cost of printing being considerable), and then entry to the public domain making for easy and open competition. It would be like saying today that a monopoly period of 14 months on a book was inhibiting competition - such a period allows recovery of costs, and so aids the dissemination of literary and artistic works by make it cost-effective. Yes, it inhibits competition, but key to the other aims is that this inhibition is limited in order to provide a genuine, timely benefit to the public.