Subject:
|
Re: Cultures, words, meanings and ownership (was Was Re: "piffle!" (bowdlerised for your protection)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 30 Oct 2001 18:16:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
726 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Low writes:
> In lugnet.technic.bionicle, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > John's right, this IS debate fodder. He should have set XFUT, but I will.
> >
> > XFUT o-t.debate and let's keep it out of other groups if it veers into the
> > subject areas... that would be my strong preference and I suspect many
> > others as well.
>
> reposting my debatable comments
>
> > In lugnet.technic.bionicle, John Neal writes:
> >
> > > , yet, when a company, like
> > > > Lego decides to rip-off names from another culture, words that have deep
> > > > religous meaning to them, you think they are the ones that are wrong. Well,
> > >
> > > As many are pointing out elsewhere in this thread, it is absurd to believe that
> > > a "culture" "owns" anything. What a load of hooey!
>
> Why is it more absurd than a corporation's claim to a trademark? Note that
> the Treaty of Waitangi (1840) http://www.govt.nz/aboutnz/treaty.php3
> explicitly acknowledges Maori entitlement to cultural heritage, which
> includes their language.
> http://www.knowledge-basket.co.nz/waitangi/reports/wai11.html
I think we all have a cultural heritage. But if we take your argument to its
(il)logical extreme, should we have the right to stop movies being made
depicting our culture? I suppose Scottish examples would be "Braveheart",
"Whisky Galore" or even “Brigadoon” (prospective tartan clad tourists please
note the place does *not* exist).
>
> If LEGO can acknowledge the importance of cultural sensitivity, why is it a
> problem for so many AFOLs (one or two in particular)?
>
> > > > I say shame on Lego, first to use the names and then to deny where they
> > > > originated, saying they made them up. You should really be saying, shame on
> > > > Lego. Here, I thought they came up with all this stuff on their own to find
> > > > out they plagiarized it all. Just like you can't copy someone else's work
> > > > in school, the business world is just the same.
> > >
> > > Except that this "culture" who thinks they have a case mostly certainly isn't a
> > > *business*.
>
> Why should corporations be privileged over other cultural groups with a
> distinct identity?
Because they have better lawyers? :)
Scott A
>
> --DaveL
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
4 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
