Posted by PTravel on 12/04/06 16:03

"Colin B" <Colin B@cb.org> wrote in message news:4573e69e$1@clear.net.nz...
> Now that it's easy to put your digital photographs and movies on to a
> video sharing site, such as "youtube", the question of whether copyright
> infringements really harm the copyright holders is now a hot topic. See,
> for example, the article titled:
>
> Youtube copyright infringements are not all bad for the copyright holders?
>
> http://fredhere.blogspot.com/
>
> What do you think of the arguments in this blog? Should copyright holders
> take a broad view and tolerate copyright infringements on youtube as is
> suggested in this blog?
>
> See also the youtube site: http://www.youtube.com/

Copyright is an exclusive right, meaning the reserved rights are owned,
entirely, by the copyright owner. It doesn't matter whether infringements
are "not all bad" or not -- copyright is, by definition, a right to exclude.
Your argument is pointless as it would mean, among other things, amending
the Constitution and ignoring several hundred years of intellectual property
jurisprudence.



>
>
>
>
>

[Back to original message]