Copyright Law Is Not Supposed To Protect Someone From Being Upset
from the shouldn't-law-professors-know-this? dept
And yet, for reasons that remain unclear, Scafidi continues to lead this charge for fashion copyright. In some interviews, she cleverly mixes counterfeits with legal copies to confuse people who don't understand the issue.
But in a recent blog post, she seems to explain her reason for supporting fashion copyright: because she doesn't want people to feel bad. At least that's the only way I can understand her post about copying the royal wedding dress, which kicks off with this story:
At the wedding of a twin years ago, a group of friends gathered around the bride at the reception to compliment her dress. Her sister and maid of honor, who was to be married only a few months later, added, "You look beautiful. I should wear it too."Of course, this has absolutely nothing to do with copyright. The proper response from a policy perspective is so what? Copyright law has never been about helping people avoid "awkard" silences and angry siblings. Copyright has never concerned itself with the idea that someone might "feel bad" that someone else copied them. Copyright is about promoting the progress of science. It seems bizarre that Scafidi would so misrepresent the very basis of copyright law in an attempt to make an emotional argument to push for an unnecessary change to copyright law that would do plenty of harm without really helping anyone.
The rather unlovely bride -- at least in terms of temperament -- turned and snapped, "Why would I let you do that?! We're already identical, and this is my dress!" An awkward silence fell as the twin sisters glared at each other.