You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Regarding Plagiarism and Intellectual Property

in #plagiarism8 years ago

purchasing the painting doesn't provide you with the rights to the created product. it provides you with the right to own the art. If you want the rights, you have to purchase them separately. If you create copies of the art you have purchased, then you have violated my rights and you will get sued. Unless you can prove that you purchased the rights, they are mine under the law of most countries.

Intellectual property belongs to the creator unless you specifically purchase those rights or the creator is willing to assign them to you.

Sort:  

If you want the rights, you have to purchase them separately.

That is an intangible derivative of the physical world reality. If I purchased the artwork, it is now my property. What you are describing would be more akin to 'renting' the artwork. I am well aware that copyright law contradicts what I am saying. My point is that copyright law falls apart under logical examination. There is no such thing as 'intellectual property'. This is why intellectual property is so difficult to define and IP law has become so convoluted as a result. It requires one to engage in logical acrobatics.

Actually, it requires an acceptance of the rights of others. At this point I'm going to leave you to live in your contrived reality and return to actual reality.