The reasons for allowing copyrights and patents vary by country. In some (particularly in Europe) the reasoning is as you present. But within the US though we have excellent records of the original reasoning behind allowing it and my statement is a correct presentation of it. For a random instance here is what Thomas Jefferson had to say on the subject. A sample:
That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property. Society may give an exclusive right to the profits arising from them, as an encouragement to men to pursue ideas which may produce utility, but this may or may not be done, according to the will and convenience of the society, without claim or complaint from any body.
This is why Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of the US Constitution reads, To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;.
There it is, in the Constitution, precisely said. The purpose of copyrights and patents in the US is to promote the progress of science and useful arts by giving authors and inventors a limited opportunity to attempt to make a profit. This must be balanced against the fact that government supported monopolies are in and of themselves generally a loss to society. Hence the importance of the limit, and the importance of having the intellectual property pass into the public domain.
The current copyright laws have so far forgotten the intent of the Constitution as to be a sick joke. :-( | [reply] |
