Quote:
Originally Posted by DonovanTrent
If Irving Berlin made some money in 1925, didn't spend it, passed it down to his heir, who didn't spend it, and it kept passing down from heir to heir unspent... at what point should that money be taken away from whatever extended heir now owns it, so it can be given out for free to anyone and everyone?
(Spare us all the political taxation replies, it's a comparative example.)
|
not the same thing the concept of copyright is temporary monopoly so that artist have an insentive to create new work, the work must go into the public domain so that other people can create new derivative work from that in the future
it is not a comparitive example becuase your trying to compare a one time accumulation of an asset that is held to a prepetual income stream.
a real comparision would be expecting to keep getting your salary after you dead and buried.