On Wednesday 13 February 2013 04:28:45 Al Thompson wrote: > On 02/13/2013 01:45 AM, Louigi Verona wrote: > > "Anyway, if his point is that property theory doesn't > > govern intellectual creation, then why does he seem to say that > > property theory > > should rule out any and all protection for one's intellectual work?" > > > > Because copyright ends up invading actual physical property. > > > > > > You ask - what is copyright? It is a legislative method to invade > > other people's > > property without their consent. Just by writing something, I instantly > > get a > > partial ownership of your body (you cannot perform my writing in public > > without my permission), partial ownership of your pen, paper, computer > > and printer (you cannot distribute my writing without my permission). > > And you did not agree to any of this. > > I don't agree with this. Primarily because if you write something, you > aren't FORCING ANYONE to listen to it. Conversely though, if there were > no copyrights, then by the mere act of writing and releasing something, > you would be giving the rights to your life/time/labor to anyone who > cared to listen (or cared to copy). > > How is that morally superior? One would presumably not release the work to the public until one had gotten a fair return on one's labour. Onbe would then have been paid fairly for one's efforts without trying to exert unnatural control over the lives of others. Without having to snoop into the actions of others to ensure that they were complying with one's dictates. Or, one would give away one's work as a gift or to further a casue one believed in. That seems morally superior. all the best, drew _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
