>it assumes that an equivalent of “reading” which it posits is permitted under copyright is somehow free.
Copyright doesn’t regulate consumption. It regulates distribution. This is why all the law tackles relate to whether or not a party is allowed to give, show, sell, or otherwise provide a material to another. It’s an easy mistake to make because there’s little reason to distribute other than to consume. It’s not a read-right or a look-at-right, it’s a copyright.
>If you want to consume copyright protected content you need - unless the copyright owner allows you
This has been the desperate dream of publishers forever, and thank-goodness copyright doesn’t work this way. Though with locking up of content though DRM and legal protection for breaking that, they get pretty close.
Copyright doesn’t regulate consumption. It regulates distribution. This is why all the law tackles relate to whether or not a party is allowed to give, show, sell, or otherwise provide a material to another. It’s an easy mistake to make because there’s little reason to distribute other than to consume. It’s not a read-right or a look-at-right, it’s a copyright.
>If you want to consume copyright protected content you need - unless the copyright owner allows you
This has been the desperate dream of publishers forever, and thank-goodness copyright doesn’t work this way. Though with locking up of content though DRM and legal protection for breaking that, they get pretty close.