tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5200276.post1304231533003506987..comments2023-12-28T06:30:48.808-05:00Comments on The Rule of Reason: Copyrights: Response to Mark Helprin's NY Times Op-EdUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5200276.post-38419909083414726782007-06-13T08:24:00.000-04:002007-06-13T08:24:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5200276.post-56138759420382652982007-06-12T11:16:00.000-04:002007-06-12T11:16:00.000-04:00Surely Jebus is smarter than ole Rand.Surely Jebus is smarter than ole Rand.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5200276.post-1968682174765117122007-06-11T10:31:00.000-04:002007-06-11T10:31:00.000-04:00Just to update readers: I sent a copy of my letter...Just to update readers: I sent a copy of my letter to the NY Times, requesting they forward it to Mr. Helprin. Mr. Helprin is a fellow or the like at the Claremont Institute in California, so I sent the text of my letter to him there. No response from either quarter to date. I have subsequently learned that the Institute is a conservative outfit. I read a pamphlet it features on its home page, "The Rise and Fall of American Constitutional Government," and it is basically an essay about how all our rights derive from God -- as a "self-evident" truth (the Bible tells us so!). So, my references to Ayn Rand in my letter would probably rub Mr. Helprin the wrong way (perhaps even "offend" him). And, that's the end of that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5200276.post-17989192720603815752007-06-10T10:04:00.000-04:002007-06-10T10:04:00.000-04:00A fantastic article, I could not agree more. You ...A fantastic article, I could not agree more. You put it simply and eloquently. Very nicely done.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5200276.post-23801192203432460042007-06-08T09:42:00.000-04:002007-06-08T09:42:00.000-04:00While I agree with your overall point - I think "p...While I agree with your overall point - I think "perpetual copyright" is nuts, for many of the reasons you mention - Mr. Helprin is correct, in the legal sense, when he says that "ideas are immaterial to the question of copyright." You cannot copyright an idea, only the expression of the idea. <BR/>Trademark or patent law may cover an idea, depending on the idea, but not copyright. From the copyright.gov FAQ page:<BR/><BR/>"Copyright does not protect ideas, concepts, systems, or methods of doing something. You may express your ideas in writing or drawings and claim copyright in your description, but be aware that copyright will not protect the idea itself as revealed in your written or artistic work."<BR/><BR/>To use your novels as an example(which I haven't read - I'm basing this only on the Amazon page of one of them, so forgive me if it is a mischaracterization) - you use a narrative structure based in the Revolutionary War to communicate your ideas about American politics and history. There is nothing stopping me from doing exactly the same thing - I too can write Revolutionary War novels that use historical narrative to support my political ideas. You don't own that idea, and even if I tell the world that I got the idea from your books, I'm not breaking the law.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com