Vigorous enforcement of copyrights themselves is an important part of the picture. But I don't think that expanding the legal definition of copyright outside of actual copyright infringement is the right move.

In this quote, Edward Felten, a prominent computer science professor and expert in digital privacy and law, discusses the enforcement of copyrights and the scope of their legal definition. Felten acknowledges the importance of vigorously enforcing copyright laws to protect intellectual property and ensure creators’ rights. However, he cautions against expanding the legal definition of copyright beyond actual cases of copyright infringement, implying that doing so could lead to overreach and unintended consequences for innovation and fair use.

The origin of this statement likely comes from discussions around the balance between copyright enforcement and the need to protect the rights of creators without stifling innovation or fair use. Felten’s quote reflects concerns about the potential for laws to be applied too broadly, especially in the digital age, where issues like digital rights management (DRM) and online sharing can complicate the enforcement of traditional copyright laws. His statement suggests that the law should focus on actual violations rather than extending copyright protection in ways that could limit access to information or creativity.

Felten’s caution against expanding the legal definition of copyright highlights the need for a balanced approach. While he supports enforcing copyright laws to prevent infringement, he warns that overly broad interpretations could hinder progress in areas like technology and education, where access to information and the ability to build upon existing works is crucial. His argument reflects a broader debate about the limits of intellectual property law and the need to avoid restricting freedom of expression or access to knowledge.

Ultimately, Felten’s quote calls for a nuanced understanding of copyright enforcement—one that protects creators’ rights without unnecessarily expanding legal protections that could stifle innovation, learning, and the open sharing of ideas. It advocates for focusing on clear cases of copyright infringement rather than overextending legal protections to cover broader issues that may not align with the original intent of copyright law.