Hi Mario, I think we have long noticed that we have our differences in that regard. Allow me to respond to and expand a little on your ideas on "intellectual property". (What I'd really like to know is what exactly appears to make this such a *hot* topic for you.)
> If you publish "your own content" = "intellectual property" on the web, > you are the copyright [1] owner. I don't think that is true. To me, personally, the thing called "intellectual property" does not exist, unless... someone specifically declares that in both a *legally binding* and *valid* way. On the other hand, simply by declaring it, I cannot claim "intellectual property" just like that. There has to be a valid basis for my claim and "I published it" simply is not good enough. You could have been publishing the work of whomever. Copyright jurisdiction was "invented" to give content creators the > possibility to earn a living. > Which is a good thing! Surely, but you have to be specific about it. Those rights don't come automagically simply by you "putting stuff out there". Most copyright laws are very strict, which is a good thing too I couldn't agree less. To me, "intellectual property" is one of the peskiest consequences that come with our, sorry, bullshit capitalist mindset. Instead of marketing and selling the ever living foo out of our plagiarized and mildly extended ruminations, we should all be sharing as freely as we hopefully breathe. To spell that out more clearly, the problem is not little ol' me, using and reusing stuff, the problem are huge corporations who think they own the entire planet and would license the air we breathe, if they could. The important words here are "exclusive rights". So my content belongs to me and nobody else. If I publish it, you can read it but that's it! Again, that is not true. It is only true, if you make a valid claim for it. If I want to grant more liberal rights for my content, I can assign a more liberal license. The opposite is true. If you want to restrict rights, you have to be specific about how you intend to restrict them in a binding way, hence "license agreements". Of course, one could have the approach of declaring the strictest and probably longest agreement in the world ...but then you have to be very specific and correct about what that means, because, obviously, you did publish it, so some use is allowed, if not encouraged. Then you could go and see, which restrictions you want to lift to not so as to not shy away users who are thinking: What the?!? (call me facebook) Also, I'm pretty sure that making mistakes in a license may legally void the entire thing. So "free" content is a good thing, if used in the sense of "free speech". Likewise, it is a good thing in the sense of "do with it what you will". Chances are, you and "they" will do that anyway. Defining a proper license for your content eg: a Creative Commons [4] > license, isn't a burden. > It's the only way to create a fair contract between you and your users. Call me naive, but I don't need that and I don't think I have to. If someone stole "my" stuff, marketed it and then sued me for having it published, so be it. I don't think there will be a court of law granting that party that right, though, as the initial claim is invalid. Which doesn't mean that I am the sole owner of my work, but that another one cannot just come and sue me at will for usubstantiated claims of intellectual property rights. Just declaring "But I declared that license, so check-mate!" does *not* suffice. On the other hand, the content has the ability to be easily spread. So if I'm famous I may get better opportunities to earn money :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6bbMQXQ180&t=1m10s ;-) Best wishes, Tobias. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
