Self-study
passage 3
P1
Proponents of the tangible-object theory of copyright argue that copyright and similar intellectual-property rights can be explained as logical extensions of the right to own concrete, tangible objects. ███
Proponents ·
of tangible-object theory of copyright
Copyrights and IP are logical extensions of the right to own concrete, tangible objects.
Proponents' Premise ·
Copyrightable works must be manifest in some physical form
If this is a necessary condition for the tangible-object theory, that's a major weakness...
Proponents' Premise ·
Ownership of object confers a number of rights to owner
E.g., right to hide; display; copy; destroy; transfer.
P2
██ ████████ █ ███ ███ ████████ ██████ ████ █████████ ████ ███ █████ ███ ███████ ███ █████ ██ ████ ██████ ███ ███████ ████████ ███ ██ ███ ██████ ████ █████████ ████████ ███ ██ ███ █████ █████████ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ███ ████ ██████████ ██ ██████ ██ ███ ███████████ ███████████ ██ ███ ███ ██████ ████████ ███ ████████ █████ ███ ██████ ███ ██ ████ ██ █████ ███████ ███
Application ·
of tangible-object theory
Creating new object from gives all rights to owner. But transferring ownership of object doesn’t necessarily transfer all rights.
General ·
Retained rights is common in other areas of law
e.g., real estate
Application ·
of retained rights
Original producer of object often retain the rights to copy for profit and to use for creation of derivative works.
P3
█████████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███ ███████████████ ███████ ███ █████ █████████ ██ ████ ██ █████████ ████████████ ████████ ██████ ███████ ████████ ██ ███ ██████ ████████ ███ ███████████ ███████████ ████ ███ ███ ███ █████████ ██████████ ██████ ████ ██ ██████ ███
Proponents' Claim ·
Chief advantage of tangible-object theory
It justifies IP rights without relying on ownership of abstract entities.
Author’s Critique ·
Tangible-object theory cannot apply to non-tangible things
E.g., live broadcast of a sporting event
Author’s Critique ·
Tangible-object theory fails to acknowledge that value is in the idea, not the physical form
Example ·
The poet v. the transcriber
Reveals weakness in tangible-object theory. Clearly it should be the poet that owns the poem, not the friend who give the poem a tangible form.
Passage Style
Critique or debate
Analysis by ZoeLight
17.
Suppose an inventor describes an ██████████ ████ ███ ██ █████████ ██ ██ █████████ ███ ██████████ ██ █████ ██████████████ ███ █ █████████ ███ ████ ████████ ███ █████████ █████ ███ ██████████ ███ ██████████ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ██████████ █████ █████ ██ ████ ████ █████ ███ ███████████████ ██████ ██ ████████████ █████████ ██ ███ ██████ █████████ ████ ███████
a
Only the engineer ██ ████████ ██ █████ ███ █████████ ██ ████████████ █████████
b
Only the inventor ██ ████████ ██ █████ ███ █████████ ██ ████████████ █████████
c
The inventor and ███ ████████ ███ ███████ ████████ ██ █████ ███ █████████ ██ ████████████ █████████
d
The engineer is ████████ ██ █████ ███ █████████ ██ ████████████ █████████ ███ ████ ██ ███ ████████ ███████ ███ █████ ██ ███ ███████ █████████ ██ ███ ██████████
e
The inventor is ████████ ██ █████ ███ █████████ ██ ████████████ █████████ ███ ████ ██ ███ ████████ ███████ ███ █████ ██ ███ ███████ █████████ ██ ███ ██████████