[ExI] New IP thread

[Colin D]

"" What IP-deniers say boils down to claiming that any act of disclosure
of information automatically authorizes copying, even if the
disclosure is explicitly accompanied by restrictions on use of the
information. They deny that voluntary participation in the exchange of
information may be accompanied by legitimate limitations on some
further uses of that informantion - but only when it suits them. When
they want to read somebody's book, see a movie or use an invention
without paying, it's "information must be free". Of course, if the
tables are turned, and somebody in real life misuses information
*they* provided, they will demand "privacy". ""

There is a huge difference between privacy and IP. (Though I shudder to use
the term 'IP'...) Copyrights and patents, now primarily within the corporate
sphere serve far more to stifle progress than to foster it. Neither
mechanism was ever intended to do this. I wouldn't necessarily argue against
Copyrights and Patents wholesale, but I would argue that, perhaps, these
should be strictly limited to individuals (with legal liability), or when
used in the corporate sphere, taxed extremely heavily to discourage hoarding
of information, which is nearly invariably the case today.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20100722/60975913/attachment.html>