This idea of intellectual property is remarkable when you think of it. Consider this.
In 1898, China leased Hong Kong to the British for a period of 99 years. In 1997, Britain held to the terms of this original agreement and relinquished all claims to Hong Kong. In comparison, many copyrighted works from the 1930s will not enter the public domain until 2072.
In 1928, Disney released the cartoon Steamboat Willie, based on Buster Keaton's "Steamboat Bill". The script for "Steamboat Willie" in fact begins with this instruction:
Orchestra starts playing opening verses of 'Steamboat Bill.'
Maybe the estate of Buster Keaton should try to sue Disney.
The intellectual property rights to Steamboat Willie were slated to expire in 2004, this date was extended to 2024 and is likely to be extended indefinitely. Since 1962 copyright terms have been extended 11 times.
Why is a whole country with a GDP of $186 billion and a population of 7,394,170 easier to let go of than a cartoon mouse?
I don't advocate the abolition of copyright, but this public domain extension issue is a good way of contemplating what intellectual property actually is and why it exists. That question IS important to this discussion.
btw, HarmlessRabbit's expensive car analogy reminded me of this thread:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...threadid=30847