[pp.int.general] Purpose of copyright

[aloa5]

Hello Richard Stallman,


What about this "traditional statement" - called the first copyright of 
modern times - The Statute of Anne, 1710.

http://www.copyrighthistory.com/anne.html
„An Act for the Encouragement of Learning, by vesting the Copies of 
printed Books, in the Authors or Purchasers of such Copies, during the 
Times therein mentioned“


So.... "Encouragement of Learning" (isn´t this nice? :) )- let´s put it 
in another (larger) body. This body will perhaps be a better reason. A 
reason wich is more important then the rights of all three as they are 
Authors, Publishers and so called Purchasers. Because all three are a 
part of it or have a profit.

Just the same as it is with patents. The main reason for patents should 
be (have been) to help all! people with innovations - so, to optimate! 
innovations.

Isn´t perhaps copyright originally introduced to bring something like 
"intellectual wealth" to the whole society? Respect - the consumers as 
thy are able to purchase a fair amount, authors as they are able to 
write for a fair fee as well as the publishers?

But this is one step too far - and only half of the truth (the 
socialist´s half). There are others to have a look on - respectfully.

Short conclusion:
I argue that copyright primarly exists to serve the interests of the 
society as a whole - including all three parts. None of the parts is 
dispensable.

:) Just my 2 cents about this after reading your interesting mail.

Greetings
ALOA







Richard M. Stallman schrieb:
> http://int.piratenpartei.de/Pirate_Manifesto_parties_at_a_glance,
> for Denmark, says
> 
>     The official aim of the copyright system has always been to find a
>     balance between the interests of publishers and consumers,
> 
> Traditional statements of the purpose of copyright have not generally
> mentioned the interests of _publishers_ as a goal.  It is rather the
> _authors_ whose interests they cite.
> 
> People do often say that the goal is a balance between the interests
> of authors and those of readers.  But I think that this idea of
> "balance" elevates the authors too much: they do not deserve to be
> given the same importance as the readers.  For more explanation, see
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/misinterpreting-copyright.html.
> 
> I argue that copyright primarly exists to serve the interests
> of the readers.
> 
> To refer to the readers as "consumers" adopts a rather narrowly
> economic viewpoint on copyright.  If we think that it is not solely an
> economic issue, we might do well to avoid the term "consumers".
> 
> Moreover, the fact that using a work of authorship does not consume it
> is a crucial basic point for our arguments.
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>