|
|
Posted by Bob Quintal on 12/08/06 02:04
"J. Clarke" <Jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote in
news:elagvr02264@news3.newsguy.com:
> On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 00:22:55 +0000, Bob Quintal wrote:
>>
>> And that is the point I'm making, is that the original
>> concept of copyright was to incease the learning of Science,
>> and useful arts, which is the practical application of
>> Science (today called engineering), not to protect works of
>> entertainment.
>
> Note that there was no distinction between books by content.
>
Not in the law itself, but one must include the authority for
creating the law, the Constitution, That stated to promote the
progress of Science. and the title of the law "An act to promote
Learning.... ...
I sorta take that as excluding "To promote the progress of
Politics...
> Also consider that the Founders understood full well the value
> of swaying people's minds by all means at their disposal.
> When does a work of literature cease to be an entertainment
> and become a tool of political activism?
Neither entertainment nor political activism are mentioned in
the Law nor the Constitution, but Science, Useful Arts and
Learning are enumerated. And literature has a connotation of
fiction, whether in poetry, prose or drama, making it a
different subset of books from books on Science..
>
>> --
>> Bob Quintal
>>
>> PA is y I've altered my email address.
>>
>
--
Bob Quintal
PA is y I've altered my email address.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|