3 ms·
> Copyright is [supposedly] granted by the state on behalf of the citizens/subjects afterall; such attempts to extend the rightsholders rights at the expense of
by Evbn 14y ago
> Copyright is [supposedly] granted by the state on behalf of the citizens/subjects afterall; such attempts to extend the rightsholders rights at the expense of the public should be limited.
Note how this argument clearly fails to apply across national borders where there is no common "state".
- glesica 14y agoYeah, maybe cross-border copyright shouldn't even exist... I don't see anything in the constitution about enforcing international copyright law within the United States. And even if it is part of an agreement with another country, it still can't violate the constitution, so the imported IP laws still have to encourage creation, right? Or are we not textualists? :-) Frankly, I don't really care whether it's legal/constitutional or not. I'm more worried about whether it's a good idea. And if free trade is a good idea, then I see no problem with what the defendant did. So Wiley charges more in Thailand, big deal. That just means that the Thai publishing industry will have more of an advantage. Markets are (in theory) dynamic all the time, not just when it is convenient for the big boys.
- pbhjpbhj 14y ago>so the imported IP laws still have to encourage creation // International treaties [arguably] do this by providing access for local producers of works to an international market. If you're a major media exporter then gaining protection in other states is going to be a net benefit even though you have to agree to protect foreign works to do that. >if free trade is a good idea, then I see no problem with what the defendant did // It's a big "if". Are there any states that truly stand behind free trade?
- pbhjpbhj 14y agoInternational treaties form a sort of virtual state out of the countries that ratify/adopt the treaty. The Berne Convention, as one example, extends the auspices of the state to the international arena. You provide benefit to your citizens by ratifying the treaty - protection of your works overseas - but you "pay" for that by also protecting the works of those from other countries. There are other treaties in this area, such as TRIPS and the WIPO Copyright Treaty. TL;DR I don't think it's as clear as you suggest.