> Copyright was originated to make the creation of intellectual property economically worthwhile so that more intellectual content could be produced and distributed.
This is often cited as the reason for copyright. Was this the actual historical reason, or just some windowdressing after the fact? (And the wording of the law in America doesn't count. It that argument hold any water, the USA PATRIOT Act wouldn't be so funny.)
Wikipedia has something like "The origin of copyright law in most European countries lies in efforts by the church and governments to regulate and control the output of printers." and similar lines.
If you want more on the history of copyright in general, I suggest looking up the works of one William Patry. He's written extensively on the subject, was the former general counsel for Google, and now writes on the subject at his blog:
And I know it's not the first copyright law (we flaunted it for years before developing our own), but the reason copyright is allowed in the USA is, "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
I know that line from the preamble of the Copyright Clause, is cited in every discussion about copyright that involves at least one American. But I doubt it's the actual reason.
To come back to my example, the USA PATRIOT act starts with "[An act] to deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, [...]" but do you think that's the only reason they passed it?
(I don't believe the USA PATRIOT act is a good example, it's just the first I could think of at the top of my head. If you look at some acts that introduce tariffs, you'll probably see more obvious hypocrisy, where it's clear that the act was introduced because some lobbyist got their say.
If you want a simple reason, I doubt you'll find one. Each of the people who agreed to that no doubt had their own reasons for doing so and I honestly don't know if we know what all they are. All I can point you to is what they agreed upon to give as their explanation.
Also, that wasn't the "preamble" to anything, that was the entire Copyright Clause. It's from the list of Enumerated Powers in Article I, Section 8 (the clause itself being clause 8), if you want to check for yourself:
This is often cited as the reason for copyright. Was this the actual historical reason, or just some windowdressing after the fact? (And the wording of the law in America doesn't count. It that argument hold any water, the USA PATRIOT Act wouldn't be so funny.)
Wikipedia has something like "The origin of copyright law in most European countries lies in efforts by the church and governments to regulate and control the output of printers." and similar lines.