Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 28th Nov 2012 15:17 UTC
Permalink for comment 543710
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 14:35 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/11/13 17:07 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/10/13 23:13 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/08/13 14:57 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/07/13 11:40 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/04/13 12:45 UTC
Linked by nfeske on 05/31/13 10:12 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/29/13 16:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-09-22
I don't agree on that, I think her point is:
copyright can stall innovation.
copyright was meant to give a someone for a limited time (8 years originally) the right to copy. Not the current 75-years after the death (!) of the author.
This gives no incentice for innovation.
Actually patents also are meant to improve the rate of innovation, but we know many, many examples especially in IT where this is not working and has the opposite affect.
So in that sense copyright and patents really are kind of in the same boot.