Ladies and Gentlemen, The time had come for me to fade away for awhile once again. Classes will begin soon and I am honored to have been given another chance to teach. In fact the only reason I have lingered here so long is that I got hit with a big bucket of "shit happening" and in many ways messing around here proved very therapeutic. For a while I did not think I would be able to teach.
Final notes: I am glad that Arlo has jumped in. His comments have been right on target. I have mentioned Lessig several times. The point for Craig in not so much that idea themselves are not automatically copyrighted. They are not until they are expressed. Once express in writing or recording they are copyrighted. It is always worth hearing from Thomas Jefferson on this one: "If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me." The constitution specifies the implementation of copyright and patents in Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries" The point is limited duration aimed at promoting. Current law is nothing of the sort. It is protectionism for powerful interests and out right theft from the public domain. With regard to jury duty Craig's comments are glowing examples of what the items on the list are aimed at combating. When citizens regard the exercise of their responsibility as a burden, the republic is in peril. A society can not compel the allegiance of its members. It can only encourage and nurture allegiance. Apparently, ours does not. Jury duty should and I believe often is undertaken in the spirit of good citizenship. But my point on informed juries is not without risk. During the '60s southern juries were known to acquit whites for murdering blacks under exactly the principle I have advocated here. As I see it the biggest problem facing us is poor citizenship. Lack of respect for laws that really don't deserve respect and for elected leaders who are not worth a bucket of warm spit. As I said we can not compel good citizenship but we sure the hell oughta start nurturing it. If not, we will get "citizens" like Micah whose comments on this are simply beyond contemptible. We are the people. We have met the enemy and break bread with them every night. We did not become cynical bad citizens over night. We will not regain faith in our ability to govern ourselves overnight or through draconian measures. I propose only a few small doable things that would encourage and nudge us in ways that would help us restore some faith in ourselves. But then even as I see half empty glasses I tend to see them through rose tinted lenses. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
