Passage Discussion

[yoohoo081]

I was completely lost in this passage. I got most of the questions wrong here
So, before I go through my wrong answers, I want to make sure that I understand the passage.

Could somebody please correct me and re-analyze the passage if I did it wrong?
Thank you!!!

1st:
Proponents of tangible-object theory of copyright argument
- necessary conditions (every copyrightable in SOME physical form/ ownership of an object confers number of rights)

2nd:
Retained rights definition and how it's applied via example
**Not completely understand 2nd paragraph**

3rd:
Back to proponents' POV and gives chief advantage.
HOWEVER, points out weaknesses
- problem of owning ideas (intangible)
- lack of knowledge that work of conceiving ideas is MORE crucial and valuable than tangible form.

OVERALL:
Majority of the passage discusses factual/ positive features of tangible-object theory of copyright
At the end, downsides are considered (author)

[maryadkins]

Great! You understand the passage better than you think!

Paragraph 2 is more or less an extension of Paragraph 1. Retained rights are a concept that exists for tangible objects as the paragraph tells us (like land), so that they would also exist for copyrighted materials is consistent with the T-O theorists' view. This is what you want to take from Paragraph 2 before moving on to the questions (as well as a basic understanding of what retained rights are: you can give up/sell an object without giving the buyer all of your rights associated with it).

[ohthatpatrick]

Scale
SIDE A: Tangible Object Theory explains our intellectual property rights: we have intellectual property rights because our intellectual products can be put into tangible form, making them our physical property just like other physical property, which we can do anything we'd like with.
SIDE B: Tangible Object Theory doesn't fully explain our intellectual property rights: we have IP rights to some things that can't be put into tangible form; also the person who puts the ideas into tangible form isn't necessarily the correct IP owner.

Author's VP/Purpose
To present and then push back against the Tangible Object Theory

Important Lines (usually Author's view)
Line 39 is when we first hear the Author's Pivot. Lines 39-54 are essentially when we hear the author pushing back against Tangible Object theory

Paragraph 1
Presenting the view of Propopents of Tangible Object Theory

Paragraph 2
Broader discussion of property rights / retained rights, then an attempt to apply that to intellectual property.

Paragraph 3
Author's criticisms of Tangible Object Theory

Takeaway/Pattern: The author dispassionately presents T.O.T. for a couple paragraphs, but the fact that she uses "proponents" foreshadows that there will be another point of view (probably hers). In the end, she lets us know that she finds this way of justifying intellectual property rights to be problematic.


#officialexplanation