I mean, that's what the US constitution says very plainly. It does seem to be a pretty unpopular take these days though.
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
The government invented intellectual property for a reason, and in this context it isn't serving it's puprose. It's not some natural law or inalienable right, it's a government monopoly that trades public rights for scientific progress.
The reason of copyright has always been to protect the current powers. To promote usefull arts has always been a whitewash. Here's e.g. wikipedia on that topic:
Comments
I mean, that's what the US constitution says very plainly. It does seem to be a pretty unpopular take these days though.
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
"To protect the children, ...."
The government invented intellectual property for a reason, and in this context it isn't serving it's puprose. It's not some natural law or inalienable right, it's a government monopoly that trades public rights for scientific progress.
The reason of copyright has always been to protect the current powers. To promote usefull arts has always been a whitewash. Here's e.g. wikipedia on that topic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_copyright