Bill Gates -- Supports Strong Intellectual Rights Laws

[Bob Russell]

In this new digital era, many are questioning the current intellectual property laws and are calling for reform. The recording industry has ruthlessly pursued file sharers even beyond what most people consider fair and reasonable. Many people wonder why it's in our best interest to keep a song's rights protected for many years. How long is long enough for content rights to get reasonable returns on the original investment required to create the work?

The battle cry has been that we must protect property rights or we will see less great movies and music and writing. The content will start disappearing because there just won't be enough revenue in it if we weaken property rights. In fact it is argued that not only must the content be protected, but the content owner should have full control over how and when it is viewed or used.

In an interview with Bill Gates at Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas by CNET news.com, we hear his thoughts about intellectual property. He answers with some pretty amazing comments like

...There are some new modern-day sort of communists who want to get rid of the incentive for musicians and moviemakers and software makers under various guises.

and

...when people say they want to be the most competitive economy, they've got to have the incentive system. Intellectual property is the incentive system for the products of the future.

Check out the article itself for more of the context for what he has to say about intellectual property and many other issues related to Microsoft's business.

But however you slice it, a big opportunity for Microsoft lies in making the most of the large revenue streams associated with content providers and content delivery systems. Microsoft is unlikely to support any weakening of copyright or patent laws as long as they expect to have a piece of that pie. Good or bad? I suppose that's the $1,000,000 question.

Man, I hate to side with the big mad Micro$oft and the music industry, but it does really seem these days that anti-IP-law advocates--despite all their lofty philsophical arguments--really just want something for nothing. The word communist is a little harsh, of course, but it's certainly close to the truth.

[johnsoax]

I have no problem with companies making money on thier products, but a line must be drawn somewhere.
For instance, Mickey Mouse should be public domain now. I'm sorry that the Disney Corporation built thier business around him, but they keep lobbying for a law change everytime his cartoons are up for expiration.

Also, I can't stand that they "put the movies into the vault". They are purposefully making their product scarce, and when the copyright comes up for expiration, they just lobby for a law change, then bring out the movies for a whole new generation to buy.

CD's cost too much. They just want to keep their profits high against the laws of economics, so they get the government to prop up their rights with extra time/protections. The publishers make more than the artists. I would rather buy my music digitally straight from the artist.

[Chaos]

Well, I'm a COMMUNIST now, am I?

Want to get rid of incentive for (especially) software creators? What the hell?

Bill is living in a fantasy world where there is no GNU, GPL, or FSF (GNU's Not Unix, GNU Public Licence, and Free Software Foundation, respectively). People make open source software, not for profit, but to help others and help themselves. They often work on projects they themselves use. While I'm not against closed source software, for example OS X (which is partly open source - a nice way for Apple to do things), if it's done well and works, I do enjoy open source software, and have great respect for those who create it.

Seriously, open source advocates are NOT COMMUNISTS!

[Bob Russell]

Bill Gates explains his recent comments in part of an interview by Gizmodo...
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/porta...drm-029706.php