• SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    I think his point in this case is you own the physical item but not the information on it. If not then I could buy some musician’s cd then I could say “Now I own their music” and start selling copies of their cd, publishing it, stealing their rights to it, etc. I think we can all agree that would be bad.

    • CallumWells@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yes, you own the information on it. You don’t own the rights to distribute it to others, but you bought the information and the right to personally use it. When you buy a painting, do you only have a licence to view it?

      • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        When you buy a painting, do you only have a license to view it?

        That’s a good question. My guess is that the rights to create prints of the painting usually remain with the artist. You own that painting, you probably even own the right to display it for an entry fee, but unless the artist has granted you a license to the artwork, I don’t think you can freely create copies.

        • CallumWells@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Indeed, the right to make copies are often licenced (although you can also sell that right) because it is explicitly written in some conventions (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention?useskin=vector) that the copyright resides with the creator to begin with. I don’t think the Berne Convention deals with the option of transferring intellectual property and the copyright to them, but I’m assuming it’s mostly defined well enough in some contract law or other.