[...] I'm not claiming that IP is a natural construct; it's obviously man-made, but you can't assert that you have a natural right to every idea ever concieved. That is just as man made of an idea as IP.
*All* property rights are man-made. IMHO, it's not that we have an automatic right to every idea, but that ideas are different from other possessions. Jefferson stated:
"If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it."
That's one of the silly things of most NDAs. If you tell me something, I *cannot* forget it (Eternal Sunshine aside).
Also:
"He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation."
[money-grubber]Yes, but if I was charging for the use of my candle, and you used mine to light your own, you just cut into my profits![/money-grubber]
The problem, as is frequently the case in LDS circles, is that many people equate laws with morality. We are too young to remember that copyright law was pretty sensible in the 1970's. That battles to interpret "fair use" were still being raged. Unfortunately, that also means that many have come to believe that Life + 70 (95 years for work for hire) is completely reasonable.
I would also point out that we need not relinquish any right for theYou might next time you're in the job market.
good of the _economy_. I could give a rat's toe jam for the economy.
Just because I can get a job means something is morally, or even logically correct? Thank you, I prefer not to sell my values for money.
Isn't this a synonym in some degree for "the good of the economy"?This is a free market, the economy more or less takes care of itself, the more free the better. The question that needs to be asked when considering any copyright issue, nay, _any_ issue on law, is "What will this do for society?"
"Good for the economy" does not necessarily equal "good for society". A flagrant capitalist - like the shareholders in Zola's Germinal (and any other socialist literature) might think so.
--jeremy
--------------------
BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/
The opinions expressed in this message are the responsibility of their
author. They are not endorsed by BYU, the BYU CS Department or BYU-UUG. ___________________________________________________________________
List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
