7 Mar
2009
7 Mar
'09
3:48 p.m.
---------------Original Message:
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 10:56:44 -0500 (EST)
From: der Mouse <mouse at Rodents-Montreal.ORG>
Subject: Re: is it possible to rebuild old c64 hardware enhancements?
Ooh, another fun battle.
:)
Heh.
Actually, in an attempt to forestall a reaction I've had when making
that point in other places: I didn't say there was nothing wrong with
it; I said it is not theft, and that using language based on equating
the two merely further confuses an already confused area.
(The reaction I'm trying to forestall is the "oh, so you think there's
nothing wrong with [...sketch of copyright violation, usually further
conflating it with theft...], hmm?" one.)
Mouse
--------------Reply:
It's not just theft; apparently copying a piece of software is equivalent
to hijacking a tanker off the coast of Somalia, holding it and the crew
for millions in ransom, perhaps killing a few along the way, etc., or
the older images of slashing cutlasses, raping and pillaging, etc.
No doubt the same punishment will soon apply...
m
****
Why are you so intent on STEALING from anybody that
you can't
easily find?
Copyright violation - even if that's what this is, a poin ton
which
I am deliberately not chipping in - is not theft. [...] 
8 Mar
8 Mar
1:26 p.m.
It's not just theft; apparently copying a piece of
software is equivalent
to hijacking a tanker off the coast of Somalia, holding it and the crew
for millions in ransom, perhaps killing a few along the way, etc., or
the older images of slashing cutlasses, raping and pillaging, etc.
No doubt the same punishment will soon apply...
After all, it did immeasurable damage to western civilization
to have unfettered access to the intellectual property of
Shakespeare, Newton, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, and Babbage.
We ceratinly wouldn't want to make the same mistake with
Mickey Mouse and Excel.
(Said dripping with bitter sarcasm...)
BLS
1:38 p.m.
After all, it did immeasurable damage to western
civilization
to have unfettered access to the intellectual property of
Shakespeare, Newton, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, and Babbage.
We ceratinly wouldn't want to make the same mistake with
Mickey Mouse and Excel.
I like Beethoven better than Excel, so actually I agree with this premise. ;)
--
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- When in doubt, take a pawn. -- Mission: Impossible ("Crack-Up") ------------
6:27 p.m.
On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 blstuart at bellsouth.net wrote:
After all, it did immeasurable damage to western
civilization
to have unfettered access to the intellectual property of
Shakespeare, Newton, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, and Babbage.
We ceratinly wouldn't want to make the same mistake with
Mickey Mouse and Excel.
(Said dripping with bitter sarcasm...)
You DON'T think that Weird and Excess have damaged civilization?
9 Mar
9 Mar
11:47 a.m.
After all, it
did immeasurable damage to western civilization
to have unfettered access to the intellectual property of
Shakespeare, Newton, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, and Babbage.
We ceratinly wouldn't want to make the same mistake with
Mickey Mouse and Excel.
(Said dripping with bitter sarcasm...)
You DON'T think that Weird and Excess have damaged civilization? 
12:05 p.m.
On 8 Mar 2009 at 12:26, blstuart at bellsouth.net wrote:
After all, it did immeasurable damage to western
civilization
to have unfettered access to the intellectual property of
Shakespeare, Newton, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, and Babbage.
We ceratinly wouldn't want to make the same mistake with
Mickey Mouse and Excel.
Or Gershwin, Ellington, Shostakovitch, Britten, Vaughan Williams....
Oh, wait--those are all still under copyright, aren't they? Yup,
you;'re right--*nobody* even knows of much less enjoys their work
today because of that nasty copyright law.
Did you know that Handel swore off writing Italian opera because he
was widely pirated?
Better not to write the stuff if it's going to be stolen.
--Chuck
12:44 p.m.
After all, it
did immeasurable damage to western civilization
to have unfettered access to the intellectual property of
Shakespeare, Newton, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, and Babbage.
We ceratinly wouldn't want to make the same mistake with
Mickey Mouse and Excel.
Or Gershwin, Ellington, Shostakovitch, Britten, Vaughan Williams....
Oh, wait--those are all still under copyright, aren't they? Yup,
you;'re right--*nobody* even knows of much less enjoys their work
today because of that nasty copyright law. Did you know that Handel swore off writing Italian
opera because he
was widely pirated?
Better not to write the stuff if it's going to be stolen.
That's actually the point. When I put an idea or a creative expression
out there, I cannot say ahead of time whether it will be used in a
beneficial way or a detrimental way. I mean that both in the sense
of not being able to predict the results and not being able to dictate
the uses. If indeed I have such a strong objection to my work being
transmitted without proper attribution or even with another claiming
credit, then my emotional health would be better served by not making
the work available at all, regardless of the government's involvement.
A law that dictates what happens for 75 years after my death doesn't
significantly change my motivations for making my work available.
BLS
1:12 p.m.
On 9 Mar 2009 at 16:44, Brian L. Stuart wrote:
A law that dictates what happens for 75 years after my
death doesn't
significantly change my motivations for making my work available.
For the record, I opposed the life+75 revision of the copyright law.
And sections of DMCA are so vague that Justice has studiously avoided
testing them. Patents don't work that way and basing a term of
protection on someone's life span (i.e. it's financially more
advantageous to live to be 95 than 25) is strange at best.
But then, Mary Bono originally wanted to extend copyright protection
to perpetuity. Who knows, in 500 years, someone might still be
crooning "I got you, Babe". She had to settle for a meager 20 year
extension of the current law.
I wouldn't mind seeing copyright and patents enjoying roughly the
same length of protection--and infringement of either being a felony,
with rights and permissions approximately the same for both. (Music
copyright is a minefield in itself).
But, primarily because of WIPO and GATT and WTO, we've got what we've
got. I don't seeing things changing (at least until Mickey's lease
is about to run out).
Cheers,
Chuck
5595
days inactive
5597
days old
7 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
blstuart＠bellsouth.net -
cclist＠sydex.com -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
dm561＠torfree.net -
spectre＠floodgap.com