> because our legal system grants it as such with copyright First and formost because scientists are forced by contract to transfer their IP right of the publi

> because our legal system grants it as such with copyright First and formost because scientists are forced by contract to transfer their IP right of the publication to the publishing company if they want to publish there. > if abolishing copyright meant a more vibrant music and film industry Copyright as such was originally a good idea and was intended to provide authors with an income. But it has been corrupted over time like so many things (e.g. patent law) so that today the artists and authors benefit the least. Big publishing companies and collecting societies profit the most. So it's not copyright that needs to be abolished, but the opportunities for abuse.