🚀 go-pugleaf

Clifton Royston <clif...@lava.net> wrote in article
<5rr70k$k...@mochi.lava.net>...

(more newsgroups whacked)
> <several groups rudely snecked>
> 
> CharlieK (Char...@concentric.net) wrote:
> : sinphil@therestofthe, world.com wrote:
> : >         If it hadn't occurred to you this is the INTER-net and the
year in
> : > which your government began to turn knowledge into property is only
> : > relevant to your country.
> 
> Actually, the US Constitution was just copying a concept that was
> previously becoming widely recognized as important in European
> countries, and separating it from the earlier concept that a *monarch*
> had to grant these special rights to inventors or authors.

In some respects, a useful concept.  However, even though the
original facts associated with the opinion were wrong, the point
is well made that at one time in history, there was no concept of
intellectual property as such.
 
> : > For the rest of the world.  Our world, it has
> : > only begun in the last 100 years and only really hit in the last ten
or
> : > 15, as one by one our leaders are blackmailed and cajoled into
denying
> : > their citizens free access to knowledge. 

My main point of concern here is that certain groups of people
will not be able to access knowledge that they will need to have
in the high-information world of the future, because they
can't afford the software.  Do people really expect them
to stand idly by and settle for second rate lives
because they don't have the money?  From what
I've seen of overseas piracy statistics, it would
seem that countries such as Russia and China are going
to have the software, whether they can afford to buy
it or not.
 
> If you have knowledge, *nothing* stops you from giving it away. 

Excellent point, although getting people to pay attention is another
question.

> What is being claimed is that you have no right to *steal* information
> from someone who originated it and who assigns some value to it.

A curious sort of theft, considering that the person it is copied
or learned from still retains his copy.  Aren't people information
systems?   Couldn't
someone memorize the source code for a small program?  Is
that an infringment, also?  Or does it only become one when it
is written on paper, or in silicon?  And would it be theft of a
car if one were to use machine parts, sheet metal, etc. to build
a replica of a '97 Camaro?
 
> Without protection of copyright, no author or artist in software,
> literature, or other media, would be able to make a living from their
> work.

And this is a valid point - it would be very difficult.  However,
99% of writers, artists, musicians do not make a living
at it anyway.

Therefore, if you wish these activities to
> proceed, society must provide a way for people to make a living at
> them.  Hence copyrights, patents, etc.

But society does not provide a way for 99% of the creative
people to make a living at it.  There's a lot of
tremendous talent out there that doesn't get hired.  As
far as this relates to software, am I wrong in pointing
out that the individual programmer is a rare bird these
days?  Most are working for large corporations, aren't they?
This doesn't encourage individual initiative a lot, does it?

> : >   If you could ask Isaac Newton or Albert
> : > Einstein how much money they hoped to make out of their discoveries
would
> : > you? 

(A good rebuttal of this statement follows.)
 
> So far, you're 0 for 2.
>   -- Clifton

However, I would ask this.  How much money did Emily Dickenson
want to make from her poetry?  And how many poets, not
counting money earned from teaching as professors, actually
make their living from poetry?
Answers - none and hardly any.  When it come to the artistic
impulse, money is often the last thought of the artist, and
certainly cannot be the first.
My motive behind all this talk is to point out that there are many
sides to this group of issues known as intellectual property
and they involve cultural differences, matters of survival, and
the role of the creative person in society.  I don't pretend
to have the answers but many people, consumers and creators,
are dissatisfied with the current state of affairs and the
proposals to fix them.

                                     Sincerely, Michael Egan

                                  
 
> --
>     Clifton Royston   --  President, LavaNet Inc.  --  clif...@lava.net
> Grosvenor Center .. Makai Tower, #1590 .. 733 Bishop St. .. Honolulu HI
96813
>      Phone: +1 808 545-LAVA (545-5282)   Auto-info email: in...@lava.net
>