The rights that are established under the Copyright Act take into account the public interest. I don't think anybody has an absolute property right. It isn't in real property; it isn't in tangible property; and it isn't in copyright.
I do believe, however, that effective rights and effective remedies are essential, just as they are to any other property owner. We have laws against theft. We have laws against stealing. These are meant to protect property and to ensure that owners of property can exploit it in a marketplace.
I believe those same principles apply to copyright. It's not absolute, but they should be like property rights, to enable rights holders to have a framework they can use to develop new products, market new products, and license products. That does two things: It creates the products and it provides a consumer benefit. The idea that somehow there is this duality of completely divorced goals of copyright, whereby one side wins and one side loses, is really wrong. As with other property rights, copyright provides a mechanism that enables copyright owners to provide consumers with what they want: new products, new services and new innovation models. We're seeing that in the marketplace.
The problem is that there are these exceptions to property rights, which are in fact creating uncertainties, undermining markets. As with other property, we need to have a regime that protects property appropriately in the public interest.