The converse, however, would be to declare porn to be useful art, and thus deserving of the constitutional protections granted thereto. I have my popcorn at the ready.
People enjoy it - if that is not enough to declare that it is "useful", then what is? How can you define any other forms of entertainment to be "useful"? How far-fetched would it be to eventually declare video games to be not "useful"? Or movies?
The concept of copyright is broken. We need something new and that doesn't go against the human nature or against people's constitutional rights. We need something that doesn't restrict sharing or freedom of speech.
How far-fetched would it be to eventually declare video
games to be not "useful"? Or movies?
Copyright (and the patent system) are fundamentally broken in the US, but I don't agree that perpetual copyright terms and SOPA follow naturally from any legal copyright system. I'm a believer in limited copyright actually encouraging innovation, and that includes with restrictions on sharing and freedom of speech (eg I publish a book, I don't believe it should be a form of protected speech to then make a copy of that book and distribute it. On the other hand, I also don't believe that should be a felony or that you owe damages of more money than you might make in your lifetime).
Freedom of speech is already restricted in many ways, and not just in ways that a cynic would point out. None of us lives alone on this planet, which implies that we will have to make concessions in systems already without an optimal solution for all parties.
I implore those commenting to consult a reference source.