Subject:
|
IP (was: Re: Any suggestions on a homepage?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 18 Jan 2000 12:26:01 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
387 times
|
| |
|
|
On Sun, 16 Jan 2000 10:55:23 GMT, Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net>
wrote:
> Right on. While taking content as your own, unattributed and
> unpermitted, is not correct, anything that you can see when you view
> source is fair game to learn from as far as I am concerned. And viewing
> source is a GREAT way to learn.
You can see content when you "view source"...
Anyway, how do you make that view jive with your copyright views?
Let's get back to those, in a separate thread. I can't even find the
appropriate posts anymore.
You've said earlier that you think copyrights are a fundamental
property right. You also stated that patents, once properly granted,
should never expire, yea unto the progeny etc.
I want to find out why you think so.
Why is an idea property?
Things to consider:
- Someone else could have the exact same idea, or even just a
somewhat similar one, completely separate. If you have a mechanism for
arbitrarily defending intellectual property of the one who got there
first, you're infringing the right of the second to market his or her
ideas.
- an idea is not a physical thing, and the world got along
just fine without any concept of IP rights for thousands of years.
Ideas are not property in any sense applicable to the normal laws of
property. This is pretty much a given.
- If I copy your idea, I do not necessarily in any way use
force on you (conceding that point as relating to physical property
for the sake of argument), or violate _any_ rights other than the
as-yet-unproven-to-exist IP right. In fact it is likely I bought your
product legitimately in order to copy it.
- Therefore any IP laws will be societal constructs, given
legitimacy by a utilitarian argument.
As a libertarian society wishes to reduce all laws that are not
inspired directly from rights to zero, libertarian society must not
want intellectual property laws, except as contracts agreed upon by
everyone in society. Only, because the perpetrator is unlikely to
agree to such a contract, the only way to work such a contract is by
initiation of force, which should be deeply outlawed, therefore a
libertarian society cannot abide intellectual property.
So unless you can come up with a way to produce a concept of
interllectual property using a rights based derivation, I think I've
just proven that you (and IIRC the LP feels along with you) think the
end _does_ justify the means, even when it infringes on the rights of
others, except in different ways from other people.
Jasper
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: IP (was: Re: Any suggestions on a homepage?)
|
| Property is Theft. Therefore Intellectual Property is Intellectual Theft.* *If quoted, please attribute, as a lawsuit may offend. -- Mark Rendle rendle2000@hotmail.com "Planet Earth is blue and there's nothing we can do" - Major Tom "Jasper Janssen" (...) (25 years ago, 18-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Any suggestions on a homepage?
|
| Hi everyone! I've been thinking about setting up a homepage. It's about time, computers are taking over the world :-) and my (humble) lego creations are waiting to be seen in public. Even though I get along better than OK with computers, I've never (...) (25 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.general)
|
34 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
|
|
|
|
