[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Fwd: Final updates for this Python Policy revision

Francesco Poli <frx@firenze.linux.it> writes:

> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 01:00:48 +0000 Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
> > If it's copyright, it's proprietary.
> > 
> > "proprietary" == "property". If it's copyright, it has an owner, 
> > therefore it's property, therefore it's proprietary.
> Your reasoning does not seem incorrect.

I'm doubtful that it's correct to say “If it's copyright, it has an
owner”. Copyright is *not* a property right; it's a different monopoly
right. Monopolies are held; that doesn't make the holder of a monopoly
the “owner” in a property sense.

IANAL, but it seems the attempt to frame copyright as property is not
founded in its inception nor its effects.

 \        “The industrial system is profoundly dependent on commercial |
  `\   television and could not exist in its present form without it.” |
_o__)        —John Kenneth Galbraith, _The New Industrial State_, 1967 |
Ben Finney

Attachment: pgpyDdnFzCgkp.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: