[ottah]

I believe that no, copyright does not encourage the creation of creative works, because the mechanism of an exclusive economic monopoly on a creative work supresses more expression than it encourages. Copyright may have hade more validity when the printing press was new, but in a modern context is the wrong mechanism. Instead of encouraging creativity we have instead encouraged capital acquisition and management.

[fc417fc802]

Surely the issue you speak of is largely due to duration? What's wrong with an author (for example) having exclusive rights to a book for 20 or 30 years? Shouldn't that be expected to increase his ability to create additional works?

[ottah]

So if we're talking about the extraordinary power of the state to enforce a right, it has to be in the interest of the public. What is the desirable state we're getting at? Are we maximizing the published creative works, are we concerned with making writing a profession, do we even want culture to be tied to economic activity? Seeing what fans produce with fiction and costumes; I have no doubt that we would have a vibrant and active world of art and fiction without an economic incentive. Do we as a society value the market or the art, and to what degree each?