On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, District Webmaster wrote: > 1. When you create something, you own that creation. (If not you, then > who should? The state? Society? Sounds like a communistic idea to me.) > > 2. It is not immoral to retain control of your creations, regardless of > how rich you are, or how much others may feel "entitled" it, or any > other reason. > > 3. Taking something that does not belong to you is _wrong_. It always > has been, always will be.
I deny the major and the minor of the syllogism, and call equivocation on the word "create". (Sorry, I've been paying too much attention in philosophy lately. Please forgive me.) What do you mean by the word "create"? If I go to the library, read a book of poems, go home, and using entirely my own materials (my own pen and paper and my own memory), have I "created" something? Do I own it? What exactly do I own? If I completely independently come up with the idea of "exercising a cat with a laser pointer", have I "created" something? What have I created? And do I own it? United States Copyright Law disagrees with you on both points (allowing for the word 'immoral' to be substituted by 'illegal' in the second, since the US Code deals with legality, not morality). When you "create" an expression of an idea, Copyright Law does not say you own that idea--you own an exclusive license to copy that particular expression of the idea, for a limited time. You have not created that license--the US Government creates it for you, and gives it to you. "He giveth, and He taketh away." A (supposedly) limited time later, that license is taken away from you by the US government, regardless of how rich you are, or how much you may feel "entitled" to it, or any other reason. ~ ross -- This sentence would be seven words long if it were six words shorter. ____________________ BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
