No, it really is not and this assertion makes absolutely no sense at all. Keep in mind that a monopoly refers to a single company or person selling something in a market being the only supplier of said thing. As it is easy to understand, monopolies have absolutely zero to do with this. This is a fundamental author's rights issue, where the author of any intellectual work has the right to decide who and how is allowed to use his own work, whether or not there is any sort of transaction or compensation.
That's not correct. The other poster was talking about a monopoly in the more general sense: If someone has exclusive control of a thing, they have a monopoly. It's absolutely correct to say that US copyright law grants a limited-time monopoly to creators.
You're talking about an entity that has a monopoly (generally in a market). Perhaps confusingly, monopoly is also the word we use to describe such an entity.
No, it really is not and this assertion makes absolutely no sense at all. Keep in mind that a monopoly refers to a single company or person selling something in a market being the only supplier of said thing. As it is easy to understand, monopolies have absolutely zero to do with this. This is a fundamental author's rights issue, where the author of any intellectual work has the right to decide who and how is allowed to use his own work, whether or not there is any sort of transaction or compensation.