The reason I ask with writers in particular is because, like code, having access to it necessarily means that the viewer has the ability to copy it as much as t

The reason I ask with writers in particular is because, like code, having access to it necessarily means that the viewer has the ability to copy it as much as they'd like. Unlike software, however, there is no ability to keep the source code private in a book while still having users. I definitely agree that copyright protections have become far too strong but I don't think we can really ever know if we would have be able to build the strong open source community we have today without coopting the copyright system for copyleft protections. At the same time, perhaps we are past the point where it's necessary and now it's holding us back... it's entirely possible! To the first thought, I personally see some coding as a creative act (some is doing _a lot_ of work there though). It's not because I fancy myself a Picasso but because I think some (again, doing a lot of work!) solutions/ideas have a bit of their creator in them and, for those works, the author should be able to exert some control over their works. I think this is more philosophical than legal/political, but I would disagree that its flippant :)