1. that digital content cannot be used without copying it
2. that all physical content can be digitised
3. that all digital content can be physicalised
4. that digital content can be immediately copied to everyone in the world with no effort at no cost
5. that digital rights management does not work and is being phased out

Work out a rights management law (I don't want to say "copyright") around those acknowledgements.

It should be noted:

1. you cannot use digital content without it being copied, but you can use digital content without keeping a copy of that content, and you do not need infinite copies of that content, nor do you (as a consumer) need to share that copy with others
2. currently it takes some effect to convert some physicalised content to digital, some more than others (written text, audio, video), but we are moving toward a world where all content is initially created and/or sold in a digital format
3. huge amounts of digital content will take huge amounts of physical data media, and often it will not make any sense to convert the digital content to a physical medium
4. there is currently a minimal amount of effort to upload, torrent, send content to others on the internet, but we are certainly a long way toward "instantly available to everyone" and any new law should assume that soon this will effectively be true
5. Australian law allows consumers to ignore DVD regions, many DVDs these days come with a "digital copy", iTunes has dropped DRM and most music stores do not sell DRM music, all existing DRM schemes have been broken...

Discuss?

In the digital world, it is impossible to meaningfully use any content without copying it. Even streaming, or just viewing something involves many "copies".

The intention of copyright is to provide the author with a monopoly on the distribution of their creation.

It is intended to prevent consumers deliberately obtaining that creation without paying for it (if you wish people to pay for it) and prevent people making copies of creations to distribute (for free or for profit) without the author's permission.

It wasn't/isn't ultimately intended to prevent someone making a copy for their own personal use.

Is it?

Maybe in any re-visioning of "copyright" we should remove the word "copy".