Is this MD or the OK Corral? Cool down, everybody! Nice that while many -not me- are
saying (on MF) that maybe the self does not exist, here we find a lot of people
arguing about who is the legal owner of ideas.
[and they say that Latins have hot minds!]
By the way, copyright rules are not the same all over the world, I guess. On this
point, I think that sometimes the copyright has something of immoral, when it's an
economic pattern which is devouring an intellectual one. Anyway, this is not the
point. We have here an individual (Diana) defending *her own* ideas. In this case, a
possible solution could be a pseudonymous for Diana on the book, but, and that's
funny, all the messages are freely available by anyone on the net, and it's very
probable that the number of sold copies of an eventual book will be less than the
daily visitors to the site.
This is not a discussion about the economic/legal rights of the MD/MF/LS posters.
Moreover, Diana denied the permission and Dan said "ok, I will amend the book".
What's really the matter?
This is a discussion about a project known as Lila's Child. The idea of the project
was seemingly by Bodvar, and Dan made a huge work. Many years long. Good or bad?
Clearly Diana's denial comes from a precise point: she thinks that Lila's Child is not
a good job, and she's using the only weapon she has to contrast Dan's project. She
has such a right: more an intellectual right than legal, 'cause she is not just one of
the contributors; she has been the promoter of the mailing list.
But let's not forget that even Bodvar (are you around, Bo? ) is one of the old
promoters of the mailing lists. And that even RMP demonstrated interest on the
project.
I think that it is impossible to delete Diana's posts from the project, as well as
Bo's, Horse's, Struan's and many of the early contributors. It would become
incomplete. Take it, or leave it. As a whole. So Diana's right has consequences
also onto the other's interests. The project, as intellectual entity, is not
property of anyone particularly. It is property of all the contributors, and of all
the people interested to read it. It's not a book by a single author. It's a
collection by a moderator. Diana could be well right arguing it's crap, but the
solution is to make it better, if it's possible. If not.... the project must be
cancelled, but let's not forget that Dan worked on it about two years. Maybe it was
possible to stop him before.
bye
Marco
p.s.
I think in this occasion too many people are not applying the MOQ to a real life
event. We all are very clever to claim the MOQ when we talk about Reality, Quality,
Universe and Falling Apples. And now that we *really* face an ethical problem, all we
get is a furious donnybrook. And it's not the first time. Not good for MOQ.org: I
think this is the reason for many are unsubscribing from the list.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
