Lethem Response

In the section, Usemonopoly, Lethem claims the word "copyright" is a euphemism that disguises its true character as a "monopoly on use," (Lethem 218) hence the title. Lethem draws from law professor Jessica Litman and her critique, Digital Copyright. Litman describes how the act of copying was never inherently invasive, even before the Internet Age, but was instead a useful measuring stick to see how much an author's work was being used. She argues that now, since copies are so readily made and available, the number of copies holds no weight in the discussion of intellectual theft. Litman's ultimate point is that the laws regarding copyright infringement contain outmoded restrictions require much-needed reform in the face of new technology. Lethem focuses more on the initial claim in  Litman's sequence of argument, the claim regarding how copying a work was never fundamentally invasive. Lethem removes changing times and technology from his discussion of intellectual property and simply argues that copying and building upon a work does not take anything away from the author. Enforcing such strict copyright laws only allows for "the rapacious expansion of monopoly rights" that have "always been counter to the public interest." (Lethem 218)