Intellectual property depends in part on how one understands "property." What is proper is defined by the community. Are Napster's millions of users a community? If so, is there a sense in which they have de facto redefined what is proper?
On the other hand, if I copy a copyrighted song, I have not taken the song away. But I have taken away the instance of payment for it. What is hidden/erased is not nothing, but the absence of something - my money. Does this not have to be entered into the understanding of the economics of digital copies?
Slashdot Mirror
Intellectual property depends in part on how one understands "property." What is proper is defined by the community. Are Napster's millions of users a community? If so, is there a sense in which they have de facto redefined what is proper? On the other hand, if I copy a copyrighted song, I have not taken the song away. But I have taken away the instance of payment for it. What is hidden/erased is not nothing, but the absence of something - my money. Does this not have to be entered into the understanding of the economics of digital copies?