3f2c2e9c   
   XPost: rec.arts.tv, rec.arts.sf.tv   
   From: jimgysin@geemail.com   
      
   trag sent the following on 10/28/2009 12:31 PM:   
   > On Oct 27, 5:35 pm, Jim Gysin  wrote:   
   >> Ian Galbraith sent the following on 10/26/2009 10:21 PM:   
   >   
   >>> I don't see how wanting to set a reasonable time limit on copyright is   
   >>> selfish, self serving and stealing.   
   >> Shouldn't the creator be the one to decide what is a reasonable time limit?   
   >>   
   >> But to answer your question, it is selfish and self-serving because it   
   >> puts people in a position to get something for free that they would   
   >> otherwise have to purchase if they wanted to obtain it legally, and it's   
   >> painfully obvious that they don't want to pay for it.   
   >   
   > No, because society already paid the creator for the work by granting   
   > the creator a limited monopoly.  When the monopoly runs out, society   
   > has finished paying and anyone in society may benefit thereafter.   
   > That's the deal.   And that was the intent in the constitution.  It   
   > wasn't welfare for anyone who could cop a copyright.   It was meant to   
   > encourage active creation for society's benefit.   The interest of the   
   > creators is not even a consideration in the stated intent.   
      
   There's obviously a set of "monopoly" talking points circulating on the   
   pro-piracy networks.   
      
   --   
   Jim Gysin   
   Waukesha, WI   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)