> in 1710, that crippled the world of knowledge in the United Kingdom
How do you account for the industrial revolution under this framing, or the global dominance of the British Empire?
Its really hard to argue that 1710 onwards marked the downfall of Britain, given everything that happened in history after that.
How did the industrial revolution relate to copyright? Seems related to patents instead.
In the context of copyright we are talking about books in that century. Shakespeare predates copyright. Though, we are not only talking fiction, but also non-fiction. It's no coincidence that British inventors of that time were on to wealthy side, for the poor people couldn't afford to buy a whole lot of books. And neither did they write them.
It's not enough to invent (and patent) something. You also need to document it in various ways - so people know the invented thing exists, what it's for, how to use it, how to fix it, etc.
> poor people couldn't afford to buy a whole lot of books. And neither did they write them.
Thus the rise of circulating libraries in the 18th century, and the public (lending) library system in the 19th century. Especially after the establishment of mandatory education for children.
The industrial revolution and the British empire are both extremely clear proof that Britain was in no way 'crippled'. Particularly not in the world of knowledge, given the countless inventions involved.
If the creation of copyright was so harmful to the nation, why was there no harm?