Page 1 of 1

Michael Eisner on copyright - so stupid, yet so successful

Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 2:55 pm
by greggh
Can Someone Give Michael Eisner A History Lesson On Copyright And Patents?

http://techdirt.com/articles/20080311/190606504.shtml
Michael Eisner gave an interview at SXSW on Tuesday (with Mark Cuban acting as the interviewer). While he discussed a variety of things, at one point he was asked about copyright issues and he responded with a strongly pro-copyright statement:
"I have a long history, obviously, of believing in copyright. I think basically what separated this country from the rest of the world was patents and copyrights. President Lincoln introduced a lot of this, fought for (the idea that) to pay people for their intellectual work was no different than paying them for their physical work. And nobody would think twice about paying someone for their physical work."
Eisner has been repeating this bizarre and near totally incorrect claim about Lincoln for years. In fact, in 2002 he wrote an editorial for the Financial Times with the bizarre claim that Abraham Lincoln would hate file sharing. Then, last year, in another interview he talked about how important intellectual property was in the US since the time of Lincoln. It certainly would appear that he has Lincoln on the brain when it comes to intellectual property. There are just a few problems with this, with the first one being that Lincoln had almost nothing to do with intellectual property laws in this country. While he is the only president to hold a patent, he didn't do much with that patent, and during his administration there was no major legislative changes to either patent or copyright law. Thus, it's not at all clear why Eisner seems to repeatedly be crediting Lincoln with setting up our modern copyright and patent law.
It always amazes me how people this stupid become that successful :roll:

Re: Michael Eisner on copyright - so stupid, yet so successful

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 2:20 am
by weex
It's sad but expected. It was around September of 2005 listening to an IT Conversation with Lawrence Lessig that I learned that copyright's purpose is not to make sure people get paid for their work. It is to encourage innovation. The way it's being used now is to subjugate people (including in some cases authors) for lengthening amounts of time which needs to stop.

Intellectual property rights are necessary only where there is too little innovation without them. As I look around, it's hard to find an area where lack of innovation is a problem.