There is no such as "owning" a work. We use that as a euphemism for owning copyrights, and the only function of copyrights are to prevent others from making copies. To prevent others from sharing.
The question is whether the monetization model presented by copyright is a net positive for the author, after accounting for its chilling effect on communications for all other people in the world.
The answer is almost certainly "no," as empirically demonstrated by entire segments of IP work opting out of copyright. The open source model clearly demonstrates that you do not need to own a work to fund it or monetize it. There are similar models in other areas of art and science which allow for the funding of works without preventing others from copying them.
There is no such as "owning" a work. We use that as a euphemism for owning copyrights, and the only function of copyrights are to prevent others from making copies. To prevent others from sharing.
The question is whether the monetization model presented by copyright is a net positive for the author, after accounting for its chilling effect on communications for all other people in the world.
The answer is almost certainly "no," as empirically demonstrated by entire segments of IP work opting out of copyright. The open source model clearly demonstrates that you do not need to own a work to fund it or monetize it. There are similar models in other areas of art and science which allow for the funding of works without preventing others from copying them.