Verily I say unto thee, that The Ghost In The Machine spake thusly:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
> <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on Tue, 06 May 2008 06:22:11 +0100
> <3182816.FI2n75cBoy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> So we are still left with no solution. This renders part of the
>> whole intellectual monopoly wet dream the moguls are having a tad
>> obsolete, doesn't it?
>
> Depends on the problem, doesn't it? Are we:
>
> [1] defending the right for a consumer to use the data file (which
> may contain copyrighted works) as he sees fit?
>
> [2] defending the right for a producer to restrict use of a data file
> which contain his copyrighted works as *he* sees fit?
Use and distribution are not the same, and even with distribution there
are first-sale rights. If Intellectual Property truly is property, then
once purchased the buyer should be allowed to do whatever he wants with
it. Period.
Look at that Universal case where they tried to claim *throwing away* a
promo CD is illegal. It's perverse. This Intellectual Monopoly crap has
to end. Now.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
| ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
`----
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
21:29:55 up 137 days, 18:05, 5 users, load average: 0.20, 0.67, 0.41
|
|
