At 7:28 PM -0500 7/30/07, Larry Garfield wrote:
On Monday 30 July 2007, tedd wrote:
> What about descendants of the author? When anyone dies, their
descendants have a rightful claim on their parent's assets -- it been
that way since the dawn of mankind. Do you think you know better than
the practice of thousands of generations?
Actually no, property law didn't really come in until civilization, some 5000
years ago, which is rather small on the scale of "dawn of mankind".
Mankind has been on this Earth for more than a million years.
Mankind's first known works of art were published in the caves of
Altamira and Lascaux 15,000 to 10,000 B.C. Physical sculpted items
such as the "Venus of Willendorf" were things that certainly could be
passed down to descendants.
Are you telling me that the son of that artist did not claim
ownership of that item after his father died? That doesn't seem
reasonable. If you're father died, wouldn't you want to inherit his
work? That seems more reasonable to me.
copyright didn't exist until perhaps 5 centuries ago in England, and covered
just publication, and was for less than 20 years. Copyright being long
enough term for inheritance to matter is less than a century. Over the scale
of human history, unrestricted information flow has been the rule, not the
exception.
Over the scale of history, it was usually the strongest who took what
they wanted.
But what you're suggesting is that legalized extortion should be inheritable.
Copyright is, fundamentally, legalized extortion as a means of "promoting the
progress of Science and the Useful Arts".
Extortion? Are you saying that anyone who owes a copyright is
obtaining money through force or threats? That sounds strange.
Do you keep paying the guy who
built your TV every time you watch something on it? Do you keep paying the
company that built your house every time you move? Do you pay your teachers
from college every time you use something you learned there? Do you pay your
dentist every time you eat?
No, I pay them for their service. The same way I pay for a book or
software. Your points are getting stranger.
This from the man who just claimed that perpetual copyright for all decedents
of an artist was a fundamental part of human existence for as long as they've
been humans. Can we stick to facts when making logical arguments rather than
completely made up nonsense?
I didn't say perpetual, but the rest is basically common sense.
In Geology there is an axiom that says "The present is the key to the
past" -- while it's not perfect, it does seem to work surprisingly
well.
I don't think that mankind 15,000 years ago was that much different
than today and if today's descendants are fighting over their
parent's processions now, then I don't think that it's unreasonable
to project that conduct back 15,000 years and make a statement to
that effect. So, it's not made up nonsense. Besides, that's the way I
remember it.
Cheers,
tedd
--
-------
http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
