- This topic has 1 reply, 10 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The Internet is the commons, la plaza central… It is the public arena FOR COMMUNICATION. If you put anything there, it is public property. Leave your privacY, your “business” and what you consider your private property at home where it belongs…. Unless you want to share it at no cost to others.
The Internet is too important to turn over to people who want to commercialize it as they have done to do many other human needs. I hope one day we can rid ourselves of this monetary system which enslaves nearly everyone.
[quote=”DavidCMurray”]Sadly, making you pay for sonething you may not want is the very face of American merchandising. If you don’t believe me, just try to buy a single six ounce Coke or even a six-pack of them. Sorry, but if you want a drink of Coke, you’ll have to buy half a liter and maybe not just one. Who among us consumers decided that we want all that Coke?[/quote]
advertising, as it is, is manuipulative. Most Big Box companies have PH.D.,etc on staff to help manipulate. BBS did a multi-part special on this.Freud’s nephew really got into that for cigarette companies and others.
One historian I can recall listening to in talk, noted under eth guild system in Middle Ages, advertising was illegal in many areas………[quote=”Scott”]Sopa support drops off as blackout protest rattles the internet
Several Republican lawmakers dropped their support of the controversial bill on Wednesday as Wikipedia, Google and Reddit spearhead a massive online protest
“Political support for controversial online anti-piracy legislation began crumbling on Wednesday as leading websites staged an unprecedented one-day protest against the measures.”
[ http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/jan/18/sopa-wikipedia-blackout-google-reddit ][/quote]
was hoping pressure could be applied by other groups-not likely on FB second to revenues and the reports FB tied to NSA……
[quote=”sprite”]. . . If you put anything there, it is public property. Leave your privacy, your “business” and what you consider your private property at home where it belongs…. Unless you want to share it at no cost to others. . . .
[/quote]Posting something for people to read freely is different than giving it away. When people copy your work and post it (re publish it) in other places it diminishes the value of that work. For centuries artists and authors have been given property rights in their work in order to be able to continue producing more work to enlighten the public.
While many people THINK the Internet is “free” it is not. Every decent web site has costs. These include annual name registration, hosting, software, secure certs and on large sites server leasing ($100/month and UP) and technical services (labor). My fixed costs are in the hundreds of dollars per month. And while I write/edit most of my own operating scripts I have thosands invested in a cart system. I suspect THIS site’s expenses are less but still significant.
THEN there is the time the webmaster puts in. If you leave a site with forums alone for just a very short time the spammers will make a mess of it. New articles and photos need to be added regularly to keep the public interested AND worst of all, the occasional server and systems upgrade (crash) or change that can soak up hundreds of hours. . .
On my site we have hundreds (may several thousand images). Most of them are photos I took or drawings I made. But many are donated. Due to the subject and the locations the photos are taken (dark dingy blacksmith shops) almost every photo is significantly reworked AKA “photoshoped”. Many have enough hours in them to be digital works of art. This is a huge cost in time, labor and creativity.
I “give” all this to the public to view freely. BUT the costs must be compensated and thus we have advertising — just as every other commercial entity on the web must have and the same for commercial radio and television.
If you take away copyright there would be no books published except by the rich and by governments and there would be no movies or television. . . unless produced and distributed by governments (the only people that would have 10’s of millions to invest).
If you think putting some control on copyright is distasteful then consider what it would be like having all your reading material coming from the rich and the government. . . Copyright and advertising is what keeps free speech alive and the Internet available.
Ownership of ideas is as absurd and evil as ownership of DNA or of human beings. Only brainwashed slaves who have had their self respect stolen from them believe in this nonsense of the sanctity of copyright and patent law. This stuff was created by predator elites to steal the wealth, freedom and humanity from their victims.
Ideas cannot be copyrighted, only the expression of that idea. Copyright does not last forever, it is limited and then the work becomes public domain.
Certain ideas can be patented but the act of patenting an idea requires public disclosure and has a very limited life. Thus things that might be kept as trade secrets for hundreds of years become public in 17 years (or less). Generally the disclosure of a patented idea awakens others to the possibility of other solutions and the result is technical advancement. Patent owners themselves search for newer BETTER ways of doing things knowing that clock is ticking.
To say Copyright (ownership of intellectual or intangible property) is absurd is no different than saying that ownership of real property is absurd (the basis of pure communism). If you do not believe in private property then as a civil person you would not refuse my use of your house, car or clothing for an indefinite period. In fact you can forget the possessive “Your” as it no longer exists in your world devoid of ownership. Borrow? Well that assumes ownership. I’ll just move in . . .
Of course most people are not that civil and they will fight (often to the death) to prevent someone from taking their property. This applies to individuals and countries. . . So we have laws that give people the right to own property and punishes others from taking it. This includes the things people create including art, music and literature (intangible property).
I agree, patenting nature IS a bad idea and the courts that allowed it after hundreds of years of refusing it were wrong. But it is a law just like any other and can be changed if the public wants. But its the same laws that keeps me from moving into “your” home for an indefinite stay without asking. You either believe in property rights and laws that support them or not.
There most certainly are things which cannot and should not be owned by any moral standard in any culture. Human beings should not be considered as property by others, for example. The exclusive use of a dwelling by an individual or the exclusive use ofyour own body is only temporary and NOT eternal ownership. But buying and owning land in perpetuity is as immoral as owning any human expression or patenting a human quality.
Give up on this one. You may find a legal argument for your position, but you won’t find a logical or moral defense.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
