Philosophy and Copyright
I believe that there is no such thing as intellectual property. Whatever one can say of ideas and information, one cannot say that they are owned by anyone. I also believe that it is not immoral to copy someone's book, movie or other work. I am not in favor of plagiarism. The copying that I am referring to is the type banned by copyright laws.
Before explaining any of the reasons for my beliefs, it would be helpful to draw a map of the philosophical territory. There are four distinct philosophical questions that are raised by my beliefs. Answers and arguments for one question are not necessarily applicable to another.
First, can information, ideas and processes be owned as property in some sense? If so, what is the nature of this property, and how does it compare with the ownership of physical things. If not, what are the implications for copying, modifying or adding to information. This question is not about the moral implications of copying. It is only about whether information can be owned.
Second, is it ever morally permissible to copy, alter or add to information of the type that we consider copyrighted? If so, then what is the nature of this? Does it permit this copying all of the time, or only some of the time. If not, then why not?
Third, should some kinds of copying, modifying or adding to information that we would consider copyrighted be forbidden or restricted by the law. This question is not decided by the answers to the two previous questions. It would depend on why one believes laws are created and what the purpose of the government really is.
Fourth, is it permissible in any circumstances to break our present copyright laws or other copyright laws that could be made. Again, this question is not determined by the answers to the three previous questions. Likely the Christian will have something substantial to say at this point.
My beliefs mentioned earlier concern only the first and second questions. We might call the first question the property question, and the second question the moral question. I have not mentioned my beliefs on the legal question or the practical question. That ends the mapping of the philosophical territory. It would make this post too long to discuss these questions in depth.
Before explaining any of the reasons for my beliefs, it would be helpful to draw a map of the philosophical territory. There are four distinct philosophical questions that are raised by my beliefs. Answers and arguments for one question are not necessarily applicable to another.
First, can information, ideas and processes be owned as property in some sense? If so, what is the nature of this property, and how does it compare with the ownership of physical things. If not, what are the implications for copying, modifying or adding to information. This question is not about the moral implications of copying. It is only about whether information can be owned.
Second, is it ever morally permissible to copy, alter or add to information of the type that we consider copyrighted? If so, then what is the nature of this? Does it permit this copying all of the time, or only some of the time. If not, then why not?
Third, should some kinds of copying, modifying or adding to information that we would consider copyrighted be forbidden or restricted by the law. This question is not decided by the answers to the two previous questions. It would depend on why one believes laws are created and what the purpose of the government really is.
Fourth, is it permissible in any circumstances to break our present copyright laws or other copyright laws that could be made. Again, this question is not determined by the answers to the three previous questions. Likely the Christian will have something substantial to say at this point.
My beliefs mentioned earlier concern only the first and second questions. We might call the first question the property question, and the second question the moral question. I have not mentioned my beliefs on the legal question or the practical question. That ends the mapping of the philosophical territory. It would make this post too long to discuss these questions in depth.
posted by Matthew at 4:56 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home