[OT] - does IP exist?

[Lars Ivar Igesund]

Manfred_Nowak wrote:

> Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
> 
>> I assert that the intention of keeping a private letter away from
>> other's eye is no different than the intention of keeping the work
>> private unless someone pays for it.
> 
> You just claimed, that after someone payed for the work he is allowed
> to put that work into the public at his own will, thereby enabling
> copying.
> 
> In fact this has been decided in a case in germany, where someone sold
> the right to publish private facts exclusive to one newspaper and then
> wanted to inhibit other newspapers to write about the same facts.
> 
> Do you want to make your statement above a bit more complicated?

I agree that it should be revised to:

"I assert that the intention of keeping a private letter away from
other's eyes is no different than the intention of keeping the work
private unless someone pay for the right to read/view it. A right to copy
it, or sell on to others, would be an additional widening of the authors
intention, and still the readers obligation to honor."

As for the case above, I am not sure it is covered by my simple thoughts.
FWIW, private facts such as those that are often exclusively paid for by
news papers can probably not be considered to be a work by the one who sold
it, but rather just information. The seller has sold it to someone else to
publicize, and thus his own rights to keep it private have diminished, if
for no other reason that it would be difficult to further assert the
intention of keeping it private on some level (ie limit to one paper). If
the seller wrote a piece (maybe an essay) that was exclusively printed in
this paper, I don't the german court would accept that it was printed
elsewhere without the express permission from the author.

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango