Subject:
|
Re: IP (was: Re: Any suggestions on a homepage?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Jan 2000 01:49:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
543 times
|
| |
|
|
On Thu, 20 Jan 2000 11:57:55 GMT, Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net>
wrote:
> That isn't quite what I mean here. Unless Cisco has invented the entire
> notion of routing based on IP packets, which I highly doubt (seems to me
> to have been placed in the PD by the IETF?? ), gettting software which
> is freely available by choice of the authors and running it on hardware
> you own free and clear hardly seems like infringing on Cisco's rights.
What I am talking abouit is where I use a desktop-class machine, sold
by say Compaq (because I have a contract with them to supply all my
machinery), instead of the server class machine or router they wopuld
otherwise have sold me.
>
> Now, if you had gotten (stolen, that is) a copy of some software that
> Cisco wrote, was selling, and was covered by a license agreement, and
License agreements are illegal, both in rights-based vision and law.
Unless you sign for it before buying, which is not the way it is done
(most of the time).
So, I've bought a copy of Word in my local shop. I am not bound by the
license agreement, because I haven't even -seen- it before buying.
Why can't I copy it on my CDR? Rights-based, that is, not legal
stance.
> I freely admit that simultaneous invention is a thorny problem and
> invite you to suggest solutions that are rights based rather than
> pragmatic. I suggest the general principle that if I independently
> invented something, perhaps I SHOULD have the right to use it, as long
> as it was truly independent rather than I invented it because I saw it
> being used.
The trick question is, _how_ do you determine who was first, and
whether or not it's truly independent? Currently, and with any system
of law-based IP rights I've ever seen proposed, the burden of proof is
upon the person who just happened to be later in filing a claim at the
patent office. Placing the burden of proof there is Wrong, IMHO. It's
another example of Guilty until proven Innocent.
IMO, the burden of proof should be on the other side: let _them_ file
a lawsuit (as now, BTW, patents are not enforced by LEO), and then
_prove_ that the other bugger stole their idea. Or at least make a
really good case for it.
> Your paperclip example is a good one. There ARE other shapes for the
> wire to be bent into that work as well. If I see a paperclip and copy it
And they exist and are sold, as well.
> exactly that seems pretty clear cut to me. If I see one, and come up
> with a different shape, have I stolen the intent of the idea? I don't
> know. I never claimed to have all the answers.
And if a hypothetical person living in Europe at the time the
paperclip was invented (which was IIRC in the US), had simultaneously
come up with exactly the same idea? Who proves what?
And now for the other major part of my argument, which I'd love to see
disproved BTW.
Going from the basic assumptions of property rights: If I _buy_ (note,
buy, aka freely exchanged) a paperclip, which right of yours do I hurt
by producing it in a cheaper way? I don't see any way to go from the
simple assumptions of property rights, as discussed a few threads
down, to intellectual property.
I just keep finding those "issues" that prevent me from believing much
in the whole "everything rights'based" arguments. I dunno, maybe it's
me.
Jasper
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: IP (was: Re: Any suggestions on a homepage?)
|
| I have to think more about the rest of your post but I did just want to point out: (...) That isn't quite what I mean here. Unless Cisco has invented the entire notion of routing based on IP packets, which I highly doubt (seems to me to have been (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
34 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
