"This goes directly against how information behaves, which is to flow freely. "
Information has neither preference nor intent, nor any other inherent behavioral characteristic(s). You could make a water or electricity analogy - but both of those are most often regulated, channeled, stored-up and rationed-out out as needed. As much as I find appeal in the notion that "Information wants to be free", information, per se, cannot want for anything at all. On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 7:13 AM, Alexis Kotlowy < thrashb...@kaput.homeunix.org> wrote: > Hi List, > > This relates to the ongoing discussion about vintage computer software > copyright. > > A year or so ago I did some Beta videotape backups for the Australian > Computer Society. They're of keynote speeches at the 10th Australian > Computer Conference in 1983. One that I'd like to mention is by Tania > Amochev from (then) Control Data Corporation, titled Information > Services of the Future. > > In it, things we now call data mining and Google AdSense are discussed, > and the potential of data services in general (this is in 1983). One > thing that struck me was the contrast between traditional copyright of > material items, and how such ideas don't apply very well to non-material > information. > > I was left with the impression that the idea of "Intellectual Property" > is in some ways an attempt to force information to be treated like > materials, which is an easy way to put a value information, but also > allows it to be hoarded. This goes directly against how information > behaves, which is to flow freely. This free-flow of information allows > more information to be derived or generated, enhancing productivity and > overall knowledge. > > To quote: "Information is diffusive - it leaks. The more it leaks, the > more of it there is. Information is aggressive, even imperialistic. It > simply breaks out of its unnatural bonds, the bonds of secrecy in which > 'thing minded' people try to lock it. So secrecy, property rights, > confidentiality, all enshrined in Western thought and law, are not > particularly effective restraints on information." > > This is not a cry to abolish copyright and intellectual property laws, > but to highlight some of the inadequacies of the thought process behind > these laws when dealing with high speed, global information. > > Does anyone have any thoughts? If there was a massive shift in the > fundamental philosophy of how information should be valued, where would > you like that shift to go? For example, is there a way to pay > programmers and similar professions by the quality of their work, rather > than just the number of lines of code they write. How do you measure the > quality of information? > > I'll see if I can get permission to have the six keynote addresses put > online, because they're all fascinating. > > Cheers, > > Alexis. > > P.S., if this is way off topic, my apologies. >
