by Nigel Holmes

Created on: September 03, 2010

Copyright laws are coming under more scrutiny, given the ease with which creative works of expression like music and writing can so easily be shared. There are those who argue that because such laws limit the freedom of the individual to redistribute such materials, they are a form of censorship. Let’s examine why this is tantamount to the “property is theft” argument.

Copyright laws are about ownership of property, and the right to profit from that ownership. When the property is a physical good, such as a car, the concept of ownership is easy to understand. The car belongs to its owner, the one who holds the title. If the owner is willing to let other people use his car, that is his right, but he also has the right to charge others to use his car. In other words, it is acceptable for the owner of an asset to profit from his ownership of that asset.

Another way to look at this might be as a return on investment. In buying a car, the purchaser invested a sum of money that could have gone into an interest-bearing bank account. By charging others for the use of his car, the owner seeks to realize a return on his investment at least equal to what he could have earned in the bank.

But what if, rather than buying the car, the owner built it from scratch? Would we still allow him to profit by renting it to others? Of course we would. What then if, rather than renting, he sells it? Well in that case he reaps a nice profit, but that then is the end of his interest. From that point on the new owner can do what he likes with the car, including renting it out to others.

Now suppose that rather than a car, it was a book that had been produced. An author had toiled away in her garret for many months to write a novel that eventually made its way to market.

People will – hopefully – purchase the book and the author will profit from her effort. And, as with the car, those buyers are free to do as they want with the book, including reselling it, but with one important proviso: they must not copy it.

Why not? Well if they were to copy the book, to give or sell to a friend, the author misses out on the sale of a second book. Put bluntly, copying the book for another person takes money from the authors pocket and is, effectively, stealing.

Now there are a number of circumstances under which this is allowed. Perhaps the most important is where the copying is for educational purposes. A second is where an excerpt from the book is reused, although here

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>