I really don't care if you believe me or not (though it's telling that you still haven't answered as to your own learnings, when you demand so much from me, but then dismiss my answer so easily), but let me just go grab one of my books... let's see "copyright in Historical Perspective" by Lyman Ray Patterson. This is known to be one of the most comprehensive texts on early copyright. Let's see what Mr. Patterson has to say on page 20, "when William Caxton introduced the printing press into England in 1476, the creation of a new form of property, eventually to be called copyright, was inevitable. The new property concept developed over some two hundred years..."
The Statute of Anne is well known and many consider it as the beginning of MODERN day copyright, but copyright was actually in development long before it, which is why the chapter on the Statute comes in the middle of the book and not the beginning. Your knowledge of copyright really has the feel of someone who only wikis things when they need to for an argument. You don't seem to grasp a lot of copyright discussion as a whole, you just pick and chose from sites off the net, then pretend like you're well versed in the subject. I know I'm no expert, but I at least know enough about copyright to know how overwhelming and extensive the subject is. That you claim to have vast knowledge of it, then fumble even with basic concepts suggests you don't even know enough to realize how little you know.
You can have the last word on this thread too. You seemed to revel in it all the other times I've let you have it, so go nuts.
no subject
The Statute of Anne is well known and many consider it as the beginning of MODERN day copyright, but copyright was actually in development long before it, which is why the chapter on the Statute comes in the middle of the book and not the beginning. Your knowledge of copyright really has the feel of someone who only wikis things when they need to for an argument. You don't seem to grasp a lot of copyright discussion as a whole, you just pick and chose from sites off the net, then pretend like you're well versed in the subject. I know I'm no expert, but I at least know enough about copyright to know how overwhelming and extensive the subject is. That you claim to have vast knowledge of it, then fumble even with basic concepts suggests you don't even know enough to realize how little you know.
You can have the last word on this thread too. You seemed to revel in it all the other times I've let you have it, so go nuts.