On Fri, Jul 07, 2000 at 07:50:25PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 7/7/00 15:34:34, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> << but people using and republishing the information without
> having committed any such deed may do so freely.
> >>
I stand by what I said.
I was considering natural rights.
I never consider but natural rights.
When governmental edicts are opposite to natural rights,
they must be abolished.


1) "intellectual property" is only information protectionism in disguise;
 it's opposite to natural rights, and one of the biggest sources of injustice
 in the industrial world. It's state-supported racket for the benefit
 of looters and moochers.
2) The US, that defends information protectionism,
 is thereby not a free country (not that there exists any).
3) I don't live in the US, and don't care about your stupid laws.
 That said, the country in which I live also has stupid laws
 (albeit different ones).

[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
[  TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System  | http://tunes.org  ]
A good answer is one that solves the asker's problem,
not one that (necessarily) fits his expectations.
Actually, if the asker has been seriously looking for a solution,
and did not find any, then there's a good deal of chance
that a good answer won't fit his expectations! (At least, not all of them.)

Reply via email to