>> If you support theft by State grant (copyright), why not taxes?
That's a trademark, not a copyright. Trademarks are just like real property in that they are genuinely scarce, and have value in their scarcity. It is not possible for two people to use the same name without interference. Indeed, they are economic "diamond goods", whose only value /is/ their scarcity, so it is theoretically possible that government could pay for itself by being the central registry of names and have no negative effects on the economy--I'm surprised this hasn't been brought up more often.
Copyright is different--by claiming a copyright to a piece of
information, the government is aiding you in enforcing a monopoly
on /all copies/ of that information produced by anyone--even
those that can be used by many people without interference. My
use of a book does not interfere with yours or anyone's. If I
make copies of it, I do not diminish anyone else's use, but I do
compete with the author's market. Our government has decided
that protecting the market for authors and inventors is worth
granting this monopoly--that is certainly arguable, because we
do not generally protect markets in other things.
Lee Daniel Crocker <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.piclab.com/lcrocker.html>
"All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past,
are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified
for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC