[pp.int.general] copyright vs. "droit d'auteur"

[Amelia Andersdotter]

2009/1/8 Richard M Stallman <rms at gnu.org>:
>    "right" to a work that's derived by one's creative activities
>    stretches a lot further back than even Gutenberg. It's present even in
>    family heirlooms of bronze age clans (such as clan patterns on axes or
>    tools, for instance).
>
> If I understand you correctly, that is something like a coat of arms.
> If so, it is nothing at all like copyright

Right, it's more like a trademark. But my point was that the concept
of something immaterial belonging to a certain person, of group of
persons, is quite old, and also quite natural. Just as tribes with
tribal axes, modern artists define themselves through their works, and
there is no particular sense in saying that's changed with the
internet or that they're silly because of it.

Modern copyright law is, I think we all agree, not optimal and needs
to be changed. But that doesn't mean discarding all of copyright as
inherently bad.

/amelia