[ExI] New IP thread

[Adrian Tymes]

--- On Wed, 7/21/10, Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com>
> > Yes I am against what you are arguing for. Ultimately
> its unrealistic
> > anyways.... if I read your words I have copied them
> into my neural net where
> > they will continue to live on and affect future output
> of mine.... have I
> > just made an unauthorized derivative work by criticing
> your emails? Will you
> > seek to sue me and repossess portions of my brain? Or
> have them erased
> > perhaps?
> 
> No, all my posts here are provided with the implicit
> understanding
> that copying them into your brain, computer, printouts,
> etc., is
> authorized. Reposting without attribution is not
> authorized.
> Commercial use is not authorized. Thinking about them is in
> fact
> warmly encouraged. These are the customary IP rights I
> claim to my
> posts.

That's fine for you, but what about someone who makes posts
and then tries to claim a far more restrictive IP licensing
scheme?  For instance, that by reading these words you agree
to become my slave for life (including any continuation on
alternate neural substrates or post-cryogenic revival)?

If one is allowed to dictate one's own IP terms, that is a
logical possibility.  Of course, as you note, one's thoughts
are one's own, even when shared via any medium, and one
should probably have some rights to them (depending on
context).  The trick is to find a balance between these
extremes.