"The moral case, although easy to sympathise with, is a way of trying to have one’s cake and eat it. Copyright was originally the grant of a temporary government-supported monopoly on copying a work, not a property right. From 1710 onwards, it has involved a deal in which the creator or publisher gives up any natural and perpetual claim in order to have the state protect an artificial and limited one. So it remains."in reference to:
"Why the rules on copyright need to return to their roots"
- Protecting creativity: Copyright and wrong | The Economist (view on Google Sidewiki)