Quote:
Originally Posted by kennyc
Again I'm not restricting this to what the ephemeral law says. I'm talking about what is right, about ethics, about morals.
|
What ethics, and what morals? This is a serious question.
If you look at the various religious texts of the world, Intellectual Property was not mentioned in them. In law, there was no codified concept of I.P. until 1714 and the Stature of Anne in England. Is is consistently perceived as a limited monopoly, which expires, and has been in all jurisdiction that have defined copyright laws ever since the Stature of Anne. Terms have changed, but the underlying "morals" have been consistent. Limited monopoly for encouragement of the creation of more "art". That's why I can download Kafka in the US, the "limited monopoly" has expired and it's free to be copied and read by anyone. Just like it was before 1714...
As far as being "Your" property... If I buy a apple from you, I can do whatever I want with it - eat it, throw it at politicians, stomp on it, give it to a teacher, ect. I bought it, so it's
mine thereafter. So, by
your own reasoning, when I buy a piece of I.P., I should have the same "rights" as I do with the apple, right? I bought it. If you say I don't have those rights, then you are admitting that I.P. is different from Physical Property, and different rules apply. So if different rules apply, how do same ethics and morals apply?