At 04:52 PM 5/11/02 -0500, Charles Martin chasm-at-mac.com wrote: >> In what sense is music software? >> >In the sense that it is a digital file of copyrighted material.
This email message is a digital file of copyright material. It isn't software. >> Labelling copying of files as "piracy" or "theft" (probably before long >> it'll be "blasphemy" or "terrorism") makes the act evil by definition. > >It's not the "label" that makes it "evil." It's the fact that it's >wrong to steal, and has been since at least biblical times. If someone Exactly my point, you label it "stealing", and proceed from there. >puts something out there with the explicit notion that he is to be >compensated for his work, and you take it without compensating him for >his work, you're stealing. End of discussion. If you can define the terms as you want, of course you win. > >> Intellectual property is an abstract concept, and using terms >> appropriate for armed robbery causing death to describe copying a file is not a >> useful way to discuss it, despite what Sony and Disney say. >> >Intellectual property is most definitely NOT an abstract concept, and >even if it was it's still covered by the law, which makes your >hypothesis moot. I didn't say it wasn't covered by the law. I said it was (more) abstract than robbery with violence. Being abstract doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. >I am definitely in the camp of people who think that the copyright >holders of this world have WAAAAAY overreacted to the P2P phenomenon, >and that the reactions so far (such as copy protection, stripping of >consumer rights, region-encoding and the whole abomination known as the >DMCA) have been excessive and abusive. > >HOWEVER, as a professional writer and graphic artist I make my living >off my brainpower. The products I produce are as real as machine parts, >and deserve EXACTLY the same protection against theft. People who claim >that IP is "abstract" are just rationalising their theft, IMHO. Actually, I'm a publishing professional too. However, to equate IP with machine parts and try to apply "EXACTLY the same protections" is possible only by making a raft of weird equations of things that are not similar at all, and the reason the "abstract concept" of intellectual property is needed, with different laws than real property. >> Also, I've noticed many, many posts discussing the merits of P2P apps >> (eg Limewire) that did not draw this level of abuse (or any at all). Why >> now has it become unmentionable? > >Because we are not out to censor free expression about P2P software (or >anything else on-topic), but we reserve our constitutionally-protected >right to a) discourage ideas we find objectionable and b) correct >opinions that are based on mistaken on ill-informed >basises (<- did I just invent a word?). Actually, it was more your attack on the person who made what seemed to be an innocent enquiry that bothered me. -- The iMac List is sponsored by <http://lowendmac.com/> and... Small Dog Electronics http://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | - Epson Stylus Color 580 Printers - new at $69 | & CDRWs on Sale! | Support Low End Mac <http://lowendmac.com/lists/support.html> iMac List info: <http://lowendmac.com/imac/list.shtml> --> AOL users, remove "mailto:"; Send list messages to: <mailto:imac-list@;mail.maclaunch.com> To unsubscribe, email: <mailto:imac-list-off@;mail.maclaunch.com> For digest mode, email: <mailto:imac-list-digest@;mail.maclaunch.com> Subscription questions: <mailto:listmom@;lemlists.com> Archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/imac-list%40mail.maclaunch.com/> --------------------------------------------------------------- >The Think Different Store http://www.ThinkDifferentStore.com ---------------------------------------------------------------
