Many, many misconceptions about copyright in this post... *sigh*

On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 08:19:09PM +0800, Dean Michael C. Berris wrote:
> Take a musician who works his behind off just to earn a living by 
> selling his products (musical compositions, etc.) and think how he would 
> feel if he knew that the sale of his products didn't benefit him. It 
> just wouldn't be fair don't you think?
> 

It isn't a question of fairness.  The public wants there to be a lot of
good music to listen to, and also it wants this music to be available at
minimal cost.  So the government institutes a system of copyright for
music, that says that for a limited time the musician can have exclusive
use of his creations so that he can find a way to make money off his
creations by restricting their use only to those who can pay him a
license for their use.

> It all really boils down to fairness. You can't blame the big company 
> who has a payroll to take care of and trade "secrets" if they want to 
> protect their products from being sold without them profiting from the 
> sale. And basically, that's the same idea behind the creation of the 
> copyright and the license agreements.

Wrong.  It is because the government, whose mandate is to protect the
public interest, has deemed it more beneficial for the public to yield
some of its liberties (remember that copyright is inherently a
restriction on freedom of speech) in order that the company may add
value to the economy by creating their copyrightable works.

> However I look at it though, piracy is just wrong.

It is not really wrong in the moral sense.  Only wrong in the sense of
illegal.  Malo in prohibido is the legal term.  The real problem with 
unauthorized copying is that it removes part of the incentive for people
to create useful content, and that is in many cases a bad thing.

> Is copying a Debian GNU/Linux CD piracy? NO because it specifically
> says in the license (GNU GPL) that you agree to that you may do so.

To be strict about it, copying Debian installers is not unauthorized
copying because there exists a license that specifically authorizes me
to make copies.  I agreed to it simply by the act of making a copy,
because nothing but the license authorized me to make such a copy.

> Now is copying and proliferating/selling an installer of a piece of
> software piracy? Yes, because it essentially means you are not abiding
> by the license you agreed to that accompanies the installer

What license?  I was not given a license for the software in the first
place, much less agreed to any, meaning I DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO COPY
IT AT ALL.  I am therefore in violation of copyright law.

> -- which is in essence is taking for your own and having your way with
> something which is not yours.

It is not taking for my own and having my way with something that isn't
mine, nevertheless.  More of the IP propaganda at work here.  I am
violating laws that a government created in order to motivate the
person/organization which was behind the act of creation to keep doing
what they are doing, which is bad enough, but that is hardly theft as
you imply.  Chances are, I would never have gotten the installer at all
and done without it instead had it not been made available as cheaply as
it had been from the illicit channels.

> The installer may be yours (media), but the software in it (assuming
> it is proprietary and there is explicit documentation that come with
> it regarding the use licensing agreement) is not -- and since the
> agreement does not allow you to copy and/or sell the product without
> a prior written legal agreement with the owner(s) of the product, you 
> are in breach of a legal contract.
> 

I am not in breach of any contract.  I never signed any contract.  Since
I wasn't granted a license by the copyright holder, what I have done is
violate copyright law, and am liable for criminal penalties under it.

I'm not a lawyer either, but I have tried to do some in-depth research
into this subject of copyright law, and see that some of your statements
propagate dangerous misconceptions about this whole string of legal
machinery which is complex enough without the misleading "intellectual
property" propaganda that you seem to have inadvertently swallowed.

-- 
The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by
the tribe.  To be your own man is a hard business.  If you try it, you'll be
lonely often, and sometimes frightened.  But no price is too high to pay for
the privilege of owning yourself.
http://stormwyrm.blogspot.com/
--
Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List
[email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph)
Official Website: http://plug.linux.org.ph
Searchable Archives: http://marc.free.net.ph
.
To leave, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/plug
.
Are you a Linux newbie? To join the newbie list, go to
http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/ph-linux-newbie

Reply via email to