Subject:
|
Re: Questions about the nature of property rights (was Re: ("life affirming" == "no initiation of force") == "all rigihts are property rights"?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 11 Jan 2000 05:23:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
655 times
|
| |
|
|
Matthew Miller wrote:
> The ideas I've expressed <URL:http://www.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=3467>
> apply only to the physical universe...They specifically don't apply to
> ideas and to minds (both animal and human).
> I don't accept the concept of property as being applicable to minds at all.
> ...Because of that, and because minds are different from matter, I
> don't accept the idea of property as applying to my mind or to anyone
> else's. I'd include animals in this even; our relationship with them is more
> complicated than that of simple property.
Well, if you are meaning a mind as different than a brain, I think it's
safe to just call it an idea (in the context you use above). It's a
complex bit of software. Whatever intellectual property rights arise
from this whole discussion would then apply. Or am I way off base?
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
29 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
|
|
|
|
