Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-02-02 Thread Branden Robinson
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 11:49:58AM +1300, Nick Phillips wrote: > So, a "natural right" is whatever is considered a right according to > whatever happen to be the morals of the dominant society of the age, > whereas the other type of right is whatever is considered a right > (or convenient, or profi

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-02-02 Thread Richard Braakman
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 11:49:58AM +1300, Nick Phillips wrote: > So, a "natural right" is whatever is considered a right according to > whatever happen to be the morals of the dominant society of the age, > whereas the other type of right is whatever is considered a right > (or convenient, or profi

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-02-02 Thread Nick Phillips
On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 11:37:31PM +0200, Richard Braakman wrote: > I think I can give a useful example here: the ancient Greeks and > Romans also kept slaves. Doing so was acceptable according to > their culture and laws, but we still think it was wrong. > The difference is precisely that we con

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-02-02 Thread Richard Braakman
On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 03:44:47PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 10:30:38AM -0500, Bob Hilliard wrote: > > Euclid lived and worked in a Greek culture, under Greek laws. > > The apostles lived and wrote in predominantly Greek cultures, under > > Roman Laws. > > I thi

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-02-02 Thread Branden Robinson
On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 07:41:15PM +1100, Paul Hampson wrote: > At this point, I looked back at the original email, and I can't see > what you're suggest copyright is, if not a right... Neither 'privelege' > nor 'responsibility' seemed to appear in your email, and those are the > words I immediatel

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-02-02 Thread Branden Robinson
You guys have been following up to both lists, when both the headers and body of the original message in this thread explicitly requested to followups to -legal only. Please stop ignoring this. On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 02:13:13PM +1100, Paul Hampson wrote: > On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 09:34:13AM -060

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-02-02 Thread Branden Robinson
[Folloups were set to -legal only; please don't ignore that.] On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 10:30:38AM -0500, Bob Hilliard wrote: > On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 11:16:24PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > > Now, then, do > > you think Euclid held a co

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-02-02 Thread Branden Robinson
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 10:03:02AM +, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote: > Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > The Universal Declaration of Human > > Rights[0], adopted by the United Nations in 1948, lists many other > > rights commonly thought of as "natural rights" or "civil rights"

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-02-02 Thread Branden Robinson
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 02:48:04AM -0600, J.B. Nicholson-Owens wrote: > Thanks for the thoughtful essay. Since you're "pulling an RMS" you might > reconsider using the term "intellectual property" in the context of > combining disparate areas of law (like patents and copyrights). You could > have

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-02-02 Thread Branden Robinson
On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 01:20:51PM +1300, Philip Charles wrote: > On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Brandon's arguments are based on the reasoning of the Founding Fathers Whose arguments? > > when they first put together US. Copyright was given by the government > > to the artist

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-02-02 Thread Branden Robinson
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 10:21:26PM -0800, Terry Hancock wrote: > A nice collection of arguments, but I'm really uncertain why you're posting > it here. Isn't this kind of "preaching to the choir"? Or did I miss > something so that the "cluebat" needs to be used on me? :-D Grep your debian-devel

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-02-01 Thread Jakob Bohm
On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 10:30:38AM -0500, Bob Hilliard wrote: > On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 11:16:24PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > > Now, then, do > > you think Euclid held a copyright in the _Elements_? Did the apostles > > of Jesus hold

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-31 Thread Lynn Winebarger
On Friday 31 January 2003 22:13, Paul Hampson wrote: > To me a right (as compared to a privelege) is something you can do, > and no-one can take that away from you. This would make a persons's set of rights empty. Lynn

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-31 Thread Paul Hampson
On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 09:34:13AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 07:41:15PM +1100, Paul Hampson wrote: > > > > I'm saying that you seem to be confused by the word. You're analyzing > > > its etymology and deriving its meaning and properties based on that. > > > This is the

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-31 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 07:41:15PM +1100, Paul Hampson wrote: > > I'm saying that you seem to be confused by the word. You're analyzing > > its etymology and deriving its meaning and properties based on that. > > This is the wrong way to analyze a legal term. Instead, you should be > > looking at

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-31 Thread Paul Hampson
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 11:09:31PM -0800, Craig Dickson wrote: > Paul Hampson wrote: > > > Copyright Act 1968 Section 31: > > http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ca1968133/s31.html > > I'm not at all sure that copyright works the same in all countries. I > suppose the related intern

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-30 Thread Bob Hilliard
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 11:16:24PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > Now, then, do > you think Euclid held a copyright in the _Elements_? Did the apostles > of Jesus hold a copyright in the gospels? If so, when did these > copyrights expire,

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-30 Thread Craig Dickson
Paul Hampson wrote: > Copyright Act 1968 Section 31: > http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ca1968133/s31.html I'm not at all sure that copyright works the same in all countries. I suppose the related international conventions impose a fair degree of uniformity, but it may not be per

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Paul Hampson
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 08:16:29AM -0800, Craig Dickson wrote: > Paul Hampson wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 11:16:24PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > > [Followup to -legal.] > > > > > > Okay, I'm going to a pull an RMS and plead for a change in our > > > collective use of certain terms. >

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Philip Charles
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 08:47:21PM +1300, Philip Charles wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Branden Robinson wrote: > > > > > [Followup to -legal.] > > > > > > Okay, I'm going to a pull an RMS and plead for a change in our > > > collective use of certain

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Jakob Bohm
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 11:45:23PM +1100, Paul Hampson wrote: > On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 11:16:24PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > ... > > > If one is unconvinced that copyrights are fundamentally different from > > natural rights, one may wish to perform a thought experiment. Do you > > believe

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Brian Nelson
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Because copyrights are not inherent, are not natural rights, are not > granted by God, but in fact merely incentive programs instituted by > governments, one does not "violate" the rights of anyone when one > disregards or acts contrary to a p

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Alessandro Rubini
> According to how I read the FSF's page, the problem is not avoided by using > another phrase to replace "intellectual property". You are right. But I think I am too :) > Any opinions you convey about copyright (for instance) probably are not true > for patents, and vice versa. Definitely. I

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Terry Hancock
On Wednesday 29 January 2003 09:58 am, Henning Makholm wrote: > > * Because copyrights are not inherent, are not natural rights, are not > > granted by God, but in fact merely incentive programs instituted by > > governments, one does not "violate" the rights of anyone when one > > disregards

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread J.B. Nicholson-Owens
/alessandro wrote: > The problem here is that no alternatives are suggested. Yes, specificity is the recommended alternative. The page (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#IntellectualProperty) says: "To give clear information and encourage clear thinking, never speak or write

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Henning Makholm
Scripsit Lynn Winebarger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Wednesday 29 January 2003 12:58, Henning Makholm wrote: > > The right to be identified as the work's author, > > etc., and the monpoly on copymaking, are two facets of the very same > > legal concept, at least in Danish law and to the best of my kn

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Lynn Winebarger
On Wednesday 29 January 2003 12:58, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * Some countries, particularly some in Europe, have a concept of "moral > > rights" that attach to creative works. I admit I am not too familiar > > with these, but they are not the s

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Henning Makholm
Scripsit Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > * Under U.S. law and the laws of most countries I'm familiar with, > copyright IS NOT A NATURAL RIGHT. ... > So, let us not speak of "copyrights" in the same way we do "rights". Your point seems to be that you think that the word "right" by itse

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Petter Reinholdtsen
[Paul Hampson] > If I write a book, isn't it mine to control who reads it? But if you publish it, you have no right to control who reads it.

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Craig Dickson
Paul Hampson wrote: > On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 11:16:24PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > [Followup to -legal.] > > > > Okay, I'm going to a pull an RMS and plead for a change in our > > collective use of certain terms. > > > > * Under U.S. law and the laws of most countries I'm familiar with,

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Simon Law
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 11:16:24PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > * Some countries, particularly some in Europe, have a concept of "moral > rights" that attach to creative works. I admit I am not too familiar > with these, but they are not the same thing as copyright and have > little in c

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread cfm
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 08:47:21PM +1300, Philip Charles wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Branden Robinson wrote: > > > [Followup to -legal.] > > > > Okay, I'm going to a pull an RMS and plead for a change in our > > collective use of certain terms. > > > > * Under U.S. law and the laws of most count

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Paul Hampson
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 11:16:24PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > [Followup to -legal.] > > Okay, I'm going to a pull an RMS and plead for a change in our > collective use of certain terms. > > * Under U.S. law and the laws of most countries I'm familiar with, > copyright IS NOT A NATURAL RIG

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > The Universal Declaration of Human > Rights[0], adopted by the United Nations in 1948, lists many other > rights commonly thought of as "natural rights" or "civil rights". > You'll note that the terms "copyright", "trademark", and "patent" do > n

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Alessandro Rubini
> reconsider using the term "intellectual property" > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#IntellectualProperty The problem here is that no alternatives are suggested. We in Italy tendo to use "intellectual patrimony" (like heritage) or "intellectual paternity" (like parenthood), ac

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread J.B. Nicholson-Owens
You wrote: > Okay, I'm going to a pull an RMS and plead for a change in our > collective use of certain terms. > > If you share either of these perspectives, then you might also wish to > help restore sanity to modern discussions of intellectual property law by > not referring to allegedly infri

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Philip Charles
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Branden Robinson wrote: > [Followup to -legal.] > > Okay, I'm going to a pull an RMS and plead for a change in our > collective use of certain terms. > > * Under U.S. law and the laws of most countries I'm familiar with, > copyright IS NOT A NATURAL RIGHT. It is a governmen

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Terry Hancock
On Tuesday 28 January 2003 08:16 pm, Branden Robinson wrote: > Okay, I'm going to a pull an RMS and plead for a change in our > collective use of certain terms. > [] A nice collection of arguments, but I'm really uncertain why you're posting it here. Isn't this kind of "preaching to the choir

Re: CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-29 Thread Thomas Hood
On Wed, 2003-01-29 at 05:16, Branden Robinson wrote: > * Under U.S. law and the laws of most countries I'm familiar with, > copyright IS NOT A NATURAL RIGHT. [...] > This means that one should not use the > terminology or rhetoric of natural rights (such as the right to free > speech, exer

CLUEBAT: copyrights, infringement, violations, and legality

2003-01-28 Thread Branden Robinson
[Followup to -legal.] Okay, I'm going to a pull an RMS and plead for a change in our collective use of certain terms. * Under U.S. law and the laws of most countries I'm familiar with, copyright IS NOT A NATURAL RIGHT. It is a government-granted limited monopoly to make and distribute copies