[IP] more on King Cotton, Meet King Copyright by Sterling Newberry
Begin forwarded message:
From: Seth Johnson <seth.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: August 15, 2004 6:01:54 PM EDT
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Ip <ip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [IP] King Cotton, Meet King Copyright by Sterling Newberry
Reply-To: seth.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For IP, if you wish.
More precise terminology is the exact constitutional language: exclusive
rights. I never use the term "intellectual property," except in scare
quotes. Exclusive rights conveys that the rights are statutory, and
alludes
directly to the Constitutional language with its various qualifying
aspects:
that this is a power of Congress to grant or deny, that exclusive
rights are
granted for a purpose, and that they have a limited duration.
It would be well if people would read "Common Sense," which turned the
tide
of opinion in the American Colonies by explaining the idea of natural
rights. Before Thomas Paine released that work, the independence camp
was
marginal, and the debate was over how to convey to England that we did
not
oppose the crown, but the Parliament's various taxes and malfeasances.
The
premise had been that the government assured us of our rights, but when
Paine published his work, the result was electric, turning the populace
strongly toward taking up arms for independence.
The corollary, of course, is that there are numerous rights that are
granted
by statute, and the distinction was foremost in the minds of the
"founding
fathers." Thomas Jefferson famously held against property being held in
perpetuity, at least as a matter of natural rights, as in his somewhat
famous letter to Madison stating his belief "that the earth belongs in
usufruct to the living," available in numerous places on the web, such
as:
http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/P/tj3/writings/brf/jefl81.htm
Seth Johnson
David Farber wrote:
Begin forwarded message:
From: Jim Balter <jim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: August 15, 2004 4:34:15 PM EDT
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: King Cotton, Meet King Copyright by Sterling Newberry
http://www.bopnews.com/archives/001265.html#1265
In business they call it the "first law of holes". If you are in a
hole, stop digging.
Here is something very simple that people could do to stop digging the
hole we are in with respect to information and its ownership.
Stop using the phrase "Intellectual Property". Under the US
constitution, there is no such thing:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for
limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their
respective Writings and Discoveries;
That US law flagrantly violates this is immaterial to the
constitutionality. That power enforces these violations of the
constitution is immaterial to the one right which ordinary citizens
have in the matter: the right to speak the truth. There is no such
thing as Intellectual Property under the US Constitution.
What phrase should one use? Intellectual Capital. The result of
discoveries and writings is based on an exclusive use, this is a
framework, not of property, but of capital. Property implies perpetuity
- one buys property and it belongs to you and your heirs forever. The
constitution does not authorize such a grant.
By calling it "property" the battle of those who are raiding the
commons is already won: it makes the expectations of the outcome the
same as the outcome of owning a house. This is not the analogy that the
constitution draws. In fact, the constitution makes clear that the
enforcement of exclusivity is a power of the people - because the
constitution can only have powers which come from the people - and not
in the work itself. It also can do so only for the purpose of promoting
the Arts and Science. Thus the right of creating "artificial scarcity"
of a work - by withdrawing it from the public - is not intrinsically
assured. After all, how does it help the arts and sciences if people
are not able to procur information?
...
--
<J Q B>
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as seth.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
--
DRM is Theft! We are the Stakeholders!
New Yorkers for Fair Use
http://www.nyfairuse.org
[CC] Counter-copyright: http://realmeasures.dyndns.org/cc
I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or distribution of
this incidentally recorded communication. Original authorship should be
attributed reasonably, but only so far as such an expectation might
hold for
usual practice in ordinary social discourse to which one holds no claim
of
exclusive rights.
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/