• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    31 year ago

    copyright is always a government enforced monopoly.

    that’s the only thing it is. it’s a law that grants exclusive rights to sell. how do you think it’s not in relation to art?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Exclusive rights and monopolies are not the same thing. Monopolies are about access to a category of things or services that fulfill a need, not one specific thing. E.g. Samsung has exclusive rights to sell Samsung TVs, but they don’t have a monopoly on TVs, and talking about a monopoly on Samsung TVs specifically makes no sense. Similarly no one has a monopoly on landscape drawings, rock music or scifi movies, just exclusive rights to specific pieces of art or literature that they created.

      As a side note, patents are a different story imo. Because overly broad patents can actually give you exclusive access to an entire category, and therefore a real monopoly. But you can’t patent art.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Because the example is not about copyright in particular but monopoly vs exclusive access. I wanted one that’s not about art to illustrate the point, and the priciple is the same in this regard.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            trademark has nothing to do with copyright. they’re two sets of laws that developed a two different times for two different reasons.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              1
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              So, what does that have to do with the exclusive rights vs monopoly discussion? Both give you exclusive rights, doesn’t matter that they come from two different sets of laws.