Napster execs needing culling

[Declan McCullagh]

On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 02:59:26PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> on Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 06:31:49AM -0800, Khoder bin Hakkin (hakkin at sarin.com)
> wrote:
> 
> > Compulsory licensing = theft, buddy.
> 
> Misappropriation, not theft.  These aren't material goods.  You might
> also read the Wind Done Gone ruling and reexamine exlusive rights to see
> what you own under copyright in a work -- hint:  it's not the work.

It all depends on your view of intellectual property.

I license photos to news organizations and other publishers. I've
licensed about $250 worth of them in three (admittedly relatively
low-value each) transactions today. If forced by the government to
license my photos at a certain rate, in principle I wouldn't be
thrilled. In practice it would depend on the per-photo rate, but
somehow I think I can do a better job of negotiating on my own. Also I
would not expect to be able to influence the Copyright Office to see
things my way in the first place.

-Declan