[LINK] Downer on FTA copyright changes

[Craig Sanders]

On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 01:54:12PM +1000, Deus Ex Machina wrote:
> as soon as someone starts talking about the broader interest
> of society then that is a prelude to violation of specific individual rights.

<yawn> libertarians are so tiresome.


> > It's perfectly legitimate to question the motivations of huge IP businesses
> > when they seek extensions at a time when the costs of publication are in
> > free-fall.
> 
> and here it is, the implied evil of being a "huge...business" somehow goes
> against the "general good", whatever the "general good" actually is. that
> somehow violating an individuals rights actually improves society as a whole.

sorry, an individual (including you) does NOT have a natural exclusive right to
any idea or expression, whether they were the first to think of it or not.

any monopoly rights an individual has to ideas are a) temporary and b) granted
by government as an incentive to produce them, as the natural state of ideas
and expressions is that they are free-for-all, i.e. in the public domain.

> so correct me if I am wrong but you are effectively saying that IP rights
> should be truncated to reduce the profits of IP right holders

you've got it arse-about.

IP "rights" are not being truncated, they have been extended (from nothing to
their current level).

the argument is whether they should or shouldn't be extended further.  in other
words, the argument is really about whether the inherent natural right of the
public to use any idea in any way they choose should be further abridged.  for
the rights of the public to be thus abridged there needs to be a compelling
public good to compensate.

this is not an issue of protecting existing rights for authors etc.  it is the
"intellectual property" equivalent of a land grab, stealing existing rights
from the public.  it is a modern day tragedy of the commons.

craig

-- 
craig sanders <cas at taz.net.au>

The next time you vote, remember that "Regime change begins at home"