[OT] - does IP exist?

[Jesse Phillips]

On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 02:32:50 -0400, bobef wrote:

> Steven Schveighoffer Wrote:
> 
>> I'll make this one post with my opinion, respond if you wish, I won't
>> answer.  But nobody's really brought this point up.
>> 
>> Violating copyright law is illegal.  Whether you think you are in the
>> right or not, it doesn't matter.  I happen to think that the copyright
>> law is pretty fair, except for the DMCA, and the ability to hold a
>> copyright pretty much indefinitely.  The whole point of copyright law
>> is to allow people to share media without losing your ability to make
>> money from it.  Not ideas, but the actual media, whether it be written,
>> audio, video, etc.  The point is that it costs a lot of money to make
>> this media, and if there is not some protection from copying, people
>> will not want to share it or make it, and that has a chilling effect on
>> society.
>> 
>> 
> What if law in my country is different from the law in your country? I
> doubt some countries even have copyright laws. What if tomorrow some
> revolution creates a new country with open minded people and they say in
> their country everyone should do what is called pirating in other
> countries? Then which law is the right one? Laws are not defaults. They
> are mental constructs. As long as the majority is fooled that the law is
> something good it works.
> 
> 
>> I can't say the same for DMCA, because I think it violates free speech.
>>  I think eventually, this law will be overturned if someone pushes it
>> hard enough.
>> 
>> 
> I don't know what DMCA is but it does violates free speech in the same
> way that copyright laws violates some other free thing (i.e. the right
> to copy what is copyable). This proves my point (including that I don't
> know what DMCA is because there is no such thing where I live). Maybe
> laws are necessary to some degree (once again because most people are
> dishonest or call it as you wish), but such laws as copyright are purely
> artificial. Big corporations will push whatever laws they need to force
> you too pay. Actually you said it in your post. These laws are for the
> authors to make money, not for freedom.
> 
> Bottom line: laws are not arguments in a logical dispute. (but you may
> have point if you live in say US and someone sues you you are screwed.
> parents need to teach their children how to be more careful when
> downloading music lol)
> 
> Btw it is interesting how the opinion of many people living in US/Canada
> and maybe some western Europe differs from the rest of the world :) Too
> bad this is probably going to change :)
> 
> Here is something to think about. Say I pay you for a copy of your
> software (music etc). What you give me is it the same piece of work that
> you produced or is it a different one (or both or neither :). If it is
> the same one and you give it to me you don't have it any more. This is
> not the case. If it is a different one why should I pay you if you are
> not giving me your work? Can't be the same and different in the same
> time. And if it is neither same nor different why should I pay anyway?
> 
> Bottom line 2: as Yigal Chripun said we need to pay for the service not
> for physical thing because this is not physical thing.
> 
> Instead of this pointless discussions why don't we discuss a better
> business model that could benefit us as developers? Any ideas? :)

If you are in a different country, then fine. You are ruled by your 
government and I am ruled by mine.