4 ms·
It's not as silly as thinking you have the moral right to control how people use copies of something just because you made the original. To be clear, I'm not a
by chc 15y ago
It's not as silly as thinking you have the moral right to control how people use copies of something just because you made the original.
To be clear, I'm not arguing against copyright. I think some form of copyright is still a good compromise that serves society well. But I don't see how you can construct a system of human interaction where copyright is more of an inherent moral right than the general right to share information (including "entertainment," which can carry great cultural value).
- J3L2404 15y agoThe software you wrote is good copyright, but the movie you want to watch is bad copyright. I don't see how this is a viable position for someone trying to make a living writing software (assuming you are).
- chc 15y agoI don't believe I said anything like that. I said that invoking "inherent moral rights" to defend a very artificial compromise like copyright is a losing game. I outright said, "I'm not arguing against copyright." I definitely think copyright is a kludge, no two ways about it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't serve a purpose. I think copyright is a good and necessary compromise, where we temporarily give up some of our natural rights in order to improve society in the long run. But I think some people place it on far too high a pedestal. Violating copyright — even my copyright — does not necessarily make you a bad, selfish person any more than my insistence that I am entitled to this weird privilege called "copyright" makes me a bad, selfish person.