Illegal is a strong word
posted by Nylorac on December 16th, 2008 at 5:10PM
posted by Nylorac on December 16th, 2008 at 5:10PM
Intellectual property is too broad.
In the given example of a cure for AIDS, IP protection rights can have greater value for society.
In the case of a song, or a fiction book, I would like to see these distributed freely without restraint. It wouldn't worsen the landscapes of the relative industries - it may just broaden it.
I feel like further study needs to be done to compare the existing categories of IP, and determine if they are being protected properly within that category.
In the given example of a cure for AIDS, IP protection rights can have greater value for society.
In the case of a song, or a fiction book, I would like to see these distributed freely without restraint. It wouldn't worsen the landscapes of the relative industries - it may just broaden it.
I feel like further study needs to be done to compare the existing categories of IP, and determine if they are being protected properly within that category.
|
posted by dennisn on December 16th, 2008 at 6:43PM
I don't understand why it's so hard for y'all to agree with me. I know it's fun to contradict me--but I'm pretty sure it goes beyond that. IMHO, y'all are really brainwashed :\; Big Brother has y'all.
I mean, think about it. All the positions that I take are for (my own and everyone else's) freedom, and you guys consistently oppose them. There's no reason to oppose them, since even if they won't benefit you (and they will), they certainly won't hurt you--whereas what I am fighting against certainly does directly and physically hurt me.
|
|
posted by dennisn on December 16th, 2008 at 6:29PM
No and no. Do you not agree that it violates our constitutional rights? Our right to our own lives? That copying, say in our own private homes, is an entirely personal action, that nobody has the right to violently prevent us from doing?
I know it's tempting to avoid the issue, and blur the laws--you have no choice really, when you're dealing with an illegal and contradictory law. So, I suppose if you want to completely trample over our most fundamental social contract, I can't stop you--but you should at least recognize that this is what you, and other copy-enforcement advocates are doing. And this careless attitude leads to precisely the kinds of ideas that you mention: sacrificing individual freedom for the "greater value for society". Number one: says who? I certainly don't agree with you there. And number two: it is illegal to violate other people's rights. There is no room for feeling and subjectivity in law, however tempting it may be. |
