Elvis is not my heritage. His estate has my blessing to try to con money out of me. I will, of course, refuse.

Intellectual monopoly is a fascist fraud.

again..here is where we may seperate

the items mentioned art the PROPERTY of the composer, artist, photographer and should be treated as their property....

there is a reason why I couldnt buy one piece of music and copy it 200 times.......

Shawn likes to steal shit.

Is there some preception that everything produced is public property?

LMFTFY -

Technology opens up possibilities; copyright laws protect these possibilities from undeserving thieves.

Property itself is a fraud, but it gets really insane when ideas can't even enter the public domain because someone is allowed to use the government to force people to comply with a statute identifying it with an 'owner'

You cannot steal an idea, at most you can copy it which isn't a crime, and actually can help people if you can do something with it that the 'owner' cannot or will not.

Just a justification for statism.

there is a reason why I couldnt buy one piece of music and copy it 200 times.......
#3 | Posted by afkabl2

Did you do that with sheet music in your classes, or is that a special deal that is set up for education.

I may or may not have photocopied something published by hal leonard once.

in grad school one part of my fellowship was to help with the library and we got word that ascap was about to do a look at us.
we had to destroy cans full of copied music and the law is real clear......you arent supposed to copy any of it but a little here and there wouldnt be a problem as there is also an 'educational' part of the law

for marching band for instance where I had 250 people...they told us in letters to district that if we bought three copies of each tune that we would have enough copied as they increased the amount of individual parts by a whole lot...
for instance used to give you about 5 flute parts and lately they are including 15 to 20
OF COURSE the price went up..

you shouldnt have to worry

"for instance used to give you about 5 flute parts and lately they are including 15 to 20"

that must make for a dense sounding piece a la Phil Specter. Would you wind up using all the parts?

Intellectual monopoly is a fascist fraud.

#2 | Posted by Shawn

I presume you have never published anything (of note).

As if "Copyrights" don't go Hand in Hand with "Capitalism"!

It Figures clueless Butch would post this contradicting and self defeating nonsense -- that moron doesn't remember yesterday let alone the parties position(s) on Property and Ownership!

#11 | Posted by Redneckville

oh goody! the wart on manyputz' behind has shown up.

Nothing is worse than a Corporations abitliy to "Patent" any individual's genome sequence. Its shouldn't be there's to take, but our so called "liberal" Courts have legalized it.

didn't biden or someone warn u.s. all a few months ago about racism in pa?

didn't biden or someone warn u.s. all a few months ago about racism in pa?

#14 | Posted by nanc

Do you even know where you are?

#15 | Posted by Manypaths

OOPS! had two comment sections open!

Honest mistakes are easily forgiven.

#17 | Posted by Manypaths

you trying to kill me?

Property itself is a fraud,
.......#6 | Posted by Shawn

......who'd a thunk that Shawn & Nanc were Communists.....

......welcome to the left Comrades......

....what's mine is yours....what's yours is mine....

.....and what belongs to Paramount belongs to us all......

.....Nozdrovya.!!....

Yes, but very slowly.

#21

i thought so. it would have to be slowly - i'm a tough old broad.

The fact is that no one can effectively control the copying of music sheet or otherwise, they cannot control the download and distribution of music, tv and movies.

So what this amounts to is one big circle jerk. If I was a fan of Elvis I could have all the free content I want without paying a dime...

and those are the facts children now go play cops and robbers.

"i thought so. it would have to be slowly - i'm a tough old broad.

#22 | Posted by nanc at 2009-07-08 03:37 P

YEAH!

And as Dumb as Stump!

Perhaps you Should Elevate this complaint Up to the WH Department of Law, butch!
Maybe you can get Sarah to argue the Case for you in the Justice League of America in front of the Super Duper Heroes!

#25 - did someone fart? if i'd wanted any lip from you, i'd have scraped it from the seat of my pants.

#25 - did someone fart? if i'd wanted any lip from you, i'd have scraped it from the seat of my pants.
#26 | Posted by nanc at 2009-07-08 04:14 PM

Awe ---- nancs a Romantic!

When you have this cuddly talk at home Does you husband assure you he will only take a minute ------- Maybe says "You Wont Even Know I was There" as a prelude?

#28 | Posted by Redneckville

a phrase you coined? i highly doubt it.

I wish I could have read more of the article but what little there was to read doesn't seem to describe anything new.

The publishing cartels, which came into existence shortly after the invention of the printing press, are naturally hostile to any new technology which might upset the status quo from which they have profited so greatly.

It's interesting to look at the status quo prior to Gutenberg. Literacy was the exclusive domain of the Church. Gutenberg's invention irrevocably weakened the Church and even gave rise to a schism and host of competing Christian sects. However, when we go to church today, we can read along in our Bible, rather than being told by some cleric what the Good Book says. Would anybody like to go back to the old way?

Well, here we are again. The technology called the Internet is a mortal threat to the publishing cartels. So far, they have mostly taken the fight to Congress and the courts, erecting protectionist roadblocks and increasing the scope of copyright laws. They even convincing Congress to make copyright violation a criminal rather than civil offense -- they don't pay to fight their battles any more, now your tax dollars foot the bill! That alone should give one pause. Especially if you are of the "small government" ideological camp, as many defenders of the publishing cartels purport to be.

I hate to break it to you, but Shawn's comment is closer to the truth than many seem to want to admit. This is a battle about freedom. Just as it was centuries ago when Gutenberg wrested the ability to create the written word from a few elite scribes beholden to Rome.

***

Here's a fun game to play, assuming you're old enough and you still have the equipment. Find a popular movie on VHS, one with a decent soundtrack. Now find that same movie on DVD. Chances are, the soundtrack will have changed because the publishing house had to re-negotiate the rights for the songs when the film was released in a different format, and they couldn't get (or didn't want to pay for) all the originals.

"Intellectual monopoly is a fascist fraud."

Wait until you write a novel that sells decently well, or a song that gets airplay, or a script that gets made into a movie. You will feel very differently then, I assure you.

Not that I'm holding my breath waiting for you to do any of those things, you understand.

whore,

I will be a published author as I just inked the contract but i still provide all of my work online for free...

I would rather be known for my impact on mankind than my impact on my wallet.

I will be a published author as I just inked the contract but i still provide all of my work online for free...

I would rather be known for my impact on mankind than my impact on my wallet.

Well you are going to be known as an idiot.

Just saying.......

MTW, so what you're saying is, intellectual monopoly is a fascist fraud, but one that certain people don't object to when it becomes profitable for them?

Is that the gist of your argument? We're all hypocrites? I am pretty sure the bulk of us already knew that about ourselves.

Hang on Snoofy, Snoofy hang on...

Nope, what I'm saying is that copyright is a way to get paid for your hard work. If you want to put something out there for free distribution, that's your privilege. But anyone writing for money needs copyright protection. Otherwise you just frickin' don't get paid. Really.

Richardspirit:

Are you seriously trying to tell me you got a book deal with a publisher who knows you're going to be giving the work away free? Pull the other one, it's got bells on it. Or is this one of those vanity presses, where they've charged you a lovely sum to put your maunderings between boards? That is, after all, "signing a contract," as you put it.

I am going to wait until Richard posts his uncopyrighted stuff online so that I can copyright is and sell it.

.....who'd a thunk that Shawn & Nanc were Communists.....

------------

No, i'm not a communist.

I'm closer to a moderate libertarian in that I believe that the state should have to prove that the public benefits from a use of state power in the creation of (corporate personhood/patent/etc) before it should be allowed to create such an exclusivity.

Most libertarians are like texasfakelibertrianjackass in that they are really just fascists who want to smoke weed.

Copyright laws exist to protect intellectual property. However, the same laws that protect music and film, can also have the unintended affect of killing interest and demand in someone's work.

So long as access to Elvis is regulated and controlled, the opportunity to see his work is limited.

I would suspect in the years to come, if his work is kept under lock and key, he will slowly fade into oblivion.

Catch 22.

If there was no legal protection for intellectual property, the computer I am using to post this message would not exist.

Nor would the servers or network, for that matter.

Open source is good, admirable and necessary, but it can't build multi-core microprocessors.

If there was no legal protection for intellectual property, the computer I am using to post this message would not exist.

---------

Dead on wrong.

All of these things were created by government contract with public monies.

The fact that we are forced to pay for these things again to a bunch of fascist asshats, and the further fact that you don't understand this is the problem in a nutshell.

If you didn't download Elvis when you had a chance a few years ago, it's your bad luck. Of course those with foresight did. :)

There are 55,000 plus hits on youtube of Elvis?

Property is property and the right of the individual to protect it with laws is inherent in our Constitution.

Richard--

It seems rather unbelievable you or your publisher would not copyright and protect your property?

Nothing wrong with putting it on the net for free. That is your choice.

But the publisher will put an anti-copy on the web site--like pdf to prevent cut and paste.

And a Copyright will be or should be plastered all over it.

Calling copyrights property in the first place is a scam. Like saying that because I invented the word "dfggfsdikdshkulgfsdbhksrdwfnk
lsdafnjdcnknkfascnljkgdefsgvar
cnk;fwed" that every time you use that word you have to pay me.

Fascism.

Welcome to the internet. You really aren't on the internet until you get your first cease and desist letter from some lawyer.

Calling copyrights property in the first place is a scam. Like saying that because I invented the word "dfggfsdikdshkulgfsdbhksrdwfnk
lsdafnjdcnknkfascnljkgdefsgvar
cnk;fwed" that every time you use that word you have to pay me.

Fascism.

#44 | Posted by Shawn

Dipshit under U.S. copyright law, individual words cannot be registered for copyright.

No, i'm not a communist.
I'm closer to a moderate libertarian in that I believe that the state should have to prove that the public benefits from a use of state power in the creation of (corporate personhood/patent/etc) before it should be allowed to create such an exclusivity.

Most libertarians are like texasfakelibertrianjackass in that they are really just fascists who want to smoke weed.

#37 | Posted by Shawn at 2009-07-08 06:13 PM

If by moderate Libertarian you mean one of the most hardcore leftists on this site you maybe on to something. The only thing as bad as a hardcore leftists is a hardcore right winger.

Property itself is a fraud
#6 | Posted by Shawn at 2009-07-08 01:55 PM

Yep that sounds very moderate and Libertarian.
No one should have property I mean I can't think of anything more Libertarian than that.

Did they teach you that in "collage"?

You're a fucking joke.

Remember you don't have to worry about loosing your freedom on the internet unless you're a thief.

Murphy (& Richard), I remember reading some book not too long ago where the author worked a deal with the (print) publisher and reserved the right to "publish" it in electronic form. It was a book about cyber-thingies (I wonder if it was Lawrence Lessig's "Code") and it was explained in the forward that reserving these rights was unusual but not unachievable.

MTW - certainly copyrights were envisioned for the purpose you describe, "a way to get paid for your hard work." However, if you look at the business today, you'll see a lot of people not doing anything creative receiving the lion's share of the money.

It is a guild system, a protectionist racket (which likely violates RICO, though RICO has plenty of problems on its own). They have the legislature in their pocket and the FBI to do their dirty work.

Silver: If there was no legal protection for intellectual property, the computer I am using to post this message would not exist.
What? Anybody is free to make a x86 CPU; the instruction set is not protected by IP law. Are you referring to the BIOS or something? There are open source BIOSes out there too.

Murphy: Property is property and the right of the individual to protect it with laws is inherent in our Constitution.
That may be, but the issue is this: As we've entered the digital age, restrictions designed to protect IP have significantly eroded fair use rights.

Let me put it another way, Murphy: Are libraries legal? Why? Don't libraries make other people's "hard work" available for free? Could an online library be legal?

I would rather be known for my impact on mankind than my impact on my wallet.
.........#32 | Posted by richardspirit

.....with thinking like that you won't make an impact on either one......

When you see something on You Tube that you think you might enjoy later, download it immediately, before it gets taken down. There are several available plug-ins for Mozilla that allow this activity. That's why you have that pair of 500-gig internal drives and a couple of terabytes of external storage. You don't? Sucks to be you!

The fact that we are forced to pay for these things again to a bunch of fascist asshats, and the further fact that you don't understand this is the problem in a nutshell.

#40 | Posted by Shawn

So should you be able to take the music written by the Beatles and sell it as your own even though you had nothing to do with the creation of that music?

we are forced to pay for these things again

Yeah right.

I fully credit the work done in academia and the military to advance computer science. In fact, I think it is great that happened the way it did.

But, if you think they would have ever created anything like what we have today, I have to disagree.

Ever programed in LISP? How about PROLOG? Ever installed UNIX on a minicomputer? That's some heavy sledding.

My point is defining the boundaries of computer science is essential but it is not the same thing as developing a useful product. That is rarely the goal of basic research, nor should it be.

Protection of intellectual property is essential if we are to advance as a nation.

US software is pirated all over the globe, most notably in China. Why is that? They are just as smart as we are, why didn't they just develop their own.

It's because they don't have an economic system that rewards innovation and productivity.

"Protection of intellectual property is essential if we are to advance as a nation."

Shakespeare didn't no stinkin' copyright laws.

Intellectual property is a misnomer. It should be called intellectual fascism. In just about every case people would benefit far more were it in the public domain so that others could add to it and make it better.

The idea that someone has a right to profit is state sponsored violence against the populace, for it requires a hit man regardless of whether he has a badge on his chest or not.

I think that covers just about all the objections except for texasfakelibertarianasshatdumb
assinbredmotherfucker. I've already labeled you a fake libertarian fascist scumbag. Go away.

nullifidan pretty much has it spot on. Real inventions advance humanity and need no state sponsored mafia don to protect them. Their virtue speaks for itself.

Real inventions advance humanity and need no state sponsored mafia don to protect them. Their virtue speaks for itself.
#54 | Posted by Shawn

That would be great if people did things to advance humanity, but most are in it to advance their bank account.

"Shakespeare didn't no stinkin' copyright laws."

Shakespeare never faced his work getting into the hands of folks who didn't pay for it. If someone wanted a copy of his work, they had to pay for a copy of his work.

"In just about every case people would benefit far more were it in the public domain"

Except the creator.

If you want something like that, invent it yourself.

There are those among us who believe Shakespeare stole plot, character, and even dialog from competing theater companies in other cities for at least some of his plays. I remember the teacher in a drama class I had to take in college for humanities said it was fairly common to steal one company's work and alter it to fit your audience.

I thought the plot of "10 things I hate about you" was familiar. How dare that Shakes-guy steal that idea for Shrew!

I think he based Shrew off an episode of Moonlighting he saw once.

Yup. That's where he got that iambic thingy....

"Ever programed in LISP?"

Yeth.

No, you need to study your Shakespeare. Iambic came from an acid trip where he was staring at a flame so long he thought he became a lighter. For three hours all he could say was "I am Bic. I am Bic."

=D

FF for 62

"No, you need to study your Shakespeare"

In college, we were doing a matinee of the Bard, and one of the actors went up during a scene. Another, doing his best to cover with a ten-syllable sentence, finally blurted,

"Sweat not, my lord. I did intend it so."

And the show went on.

Intellectual property is a misnomer. It should be called intellectual fascism. In just about every case people would benefit far more were it in the public domain so that others could add to it and make it better.

The idea that someone has a right to profit is state sponsored violence against the populace, for it requires a hit man regardless of whether he has a badge on his chest or not.

I think that covers just about all the objections except for texasfakelibertarianasshatdumb
assinbredmotherfucker. I've already labeled you a fake libertarian fascist scumbag. Go away.

#53 | Posted by Shawn at 2009-07-09 09:58 PM

Go away?

Fuck you dude you brought me up.

Lets see last night you said "property itself is fraud", tonight you say "The idea that someone has a right to profit is state sponsored violence against the populace"

Their you go again showing your "moderate libertarian" views.

Thanks for the laugh.

Since you took the liberty to label me I feel justified in labeling you.

Commie Understands Nothing To
Intellectual property is a misnomer. It should be called intellectual fascism. In just about every case people would benefit far more were it in the public domain so that others could add to it and make it better.

The idea that someone has a right to profit is state sponsored violence against the populace, for it requires a hit man regardless of whether he has a badge on his chest or not.

I think that covers just about all the objections except for texasfakelibertarianasshatdumb
assinbredmotherfucker. I've already labeled you a fake libertarian fascist scumbag. Go away.

#53 | Posted by Shawn at 2009-07-09 09:58 PM

Go away?

Fuck you dude you brought me up.

Lets see last night you said "property itself is fraud", tonight you say "The idea that someone has a right to profit is state sponsored violence against the populace"

Their you go again showing your "moderate libertarian" views.

Thanks for the laugh.

Since you took the liberty to label me I feel justified in labeling you.

Commie

Understands

Nothing

Tonight

Shawn, you wrote, "In just about every case people would benefit far more were it in the public domain so that others could add to it and make it better."

Just wanted to point out that people are free to license intellectual property rights, improve upon them, make the world better and a buck at the same time.

I think the thought is more that if a person spends say, $100,000, on developing some idea, he or she should be able to license their intellectual property, the result of their $100,000, to earn back their money and then some.

The idea that you might be allowed to simply come along and steal a already developed idea for nothing and profit at the inventor's expense is absurd. The same applies to music, photos, literature etc.

Eat shit and die off fuckface.

License = control

Want to sing happy birthday on tv? 50000.00 dollars because some asshat was first at the patent office. Total fascist scam.

You cannot steal an idea. You can copy it.

For example: I'm thinking of the number 1. Someone else though of that number first. No I'm not stealing it, I'm learning from it. The idea that someone gets to profit every time someone uses the number one to make money is obscene. The courts ruled against that specific case not on the grounds that it is ridiculous, but because it is not enforceable. Thus the standard is NOT truth, but whether the cops can FORCE you to obey.

Fascism.