Does copyright and writeright make sense logically?

From Biolicense

Jump to: navigation, search

Copyright is not logically consistent.

Legal systems need to be consistent. Forcing copyrights is difficult in many ways. Also, there are fuzzy boundaries. 

1) anyone who speaks a sentence should have a strict copyright on his speech.
2) anyone who utters some interesting remarks that are 90% similar to other people should be punished.
3) all the legal documents should be copyrighted and people who print them should pay money for those.
4) all the programs produced by computer programming languages should pay fees for those languages. I.e., Microsoft should pay money for developing programs developed by C++, C, shells, and Perl.
5) anyone who takes a picture of anything that is owned by someone else should pay fees. A person who took a picture of a tree in my garden must pay me.
6) any school child who copies down a story to learn ABCs and English, should pay for copying down the sentences.
7) programs that do similar things, such as wordprocessors, share the same logic, codes, and libraries and there should be just one copyrighted wordprocessor. Developers can produce different codes to avoid copyrights, however, actually, the codes are essentially the same. Just wasting human resource to avoid copyrights.

Personal tools
Google AdSense