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
16.
The passage most directly answers █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ██████████
a
Do proponents of ███ ███████████████ ██████ ██ ████████████ ████████ ████████ ███ ███████ ██ ████████ ████ ████████ ██ ██████████
b
Do proponents of ███ ███████████████ ██████ ██ ████████████ ████████ ████ ████ █████████ ██ ████████ ███████ ████ ██████ ███ ███████ ████████ ███████
c
Has the tangible-object ██████ ██ ████████████ ████████ ██████████ ███ ████ ██ █████ █████████ █████ ██ █████ █████ █████████ ██████ ██ ████████████ ████████ ███ ███████ ██ ███ ███████
d
Does existing copyright ███ ███████ ██████████ ███████ ████████████ ███████ ██ ███████████ ███ ███████ ██████ ██ █████ ██ █████ █████ ████████ ████ ███ ██████████ ███████ ███ █████████ ███████████
e
Are there standard ██████████ █████████ ███ ████████ ██ ████████████ ████████ ████ ███ ██████ ██ ████ █████ ████████