Verily I say unto thee, that Phil Da Lick! spake thusly:
> Ezekiel wrote:
>> "Phil Da Lick!" <phil_the_lick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote in message
>> news:zrSdnQo2z5vhkf_UnZ2dnUVZ8rSdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> See Homer's reply. Educational institutions are not companies.
>>> Students are not employees.
>>
>> I couldn't care less what Homer's ridiculous point of view is. The
>> very fact that universities are grabbing patents and attempting to
>> profit from them shows that they are indeed functioning like a
>> company.
You seem to have missed the point. I am well aware of the de facto
condition, I just happen to think it is morally unacceptable.
Education is, amongst /other/ things, a /prelude/ to business, but it
should not /be/ a for-profit business in and of itself, especially when
that "business" is funded by taxpayers' money. Private sector training
is one thing, since IMHO that is not academia, that is merely vocational
training, and if companies wish to pay contractors to train their
apprentices then so be it, but no university /should/ be operating like
a for-profit business. I'm well aware that they do, but they should not.
Perverting the process of academia into a business venture, reduces the
spirit of human endeavour down to the value of a dollar bill. It is
profoundly wrong.
>> Education is a big business and these "companies" function and act
>> just like a company. They grab patents in order to generate
>> additional revenue.
Yes they do, and no they shouldn't.
>> You keep claiming that they shouldn't do this (take patents)
>> because that's what a company would do and claim they're not a
>> company. Well... the fact that they behave exactly like a
>> corporation pretty much makes them a corporation doesn't it?
Your inability to follow simple logic is frightening, as is your
propensity for circular logic.
1. Universities should /not/ operate like for-profit businesses
2. In reality, they /do/, however
3. This is unethical because
a. It is counter to the principles of academia
b. They have no moral right to claim exclusive "ownership" of others'
ideas
c. They are publicly funded
4. Their purpose is education, not financial profit, hence the assertion
"they're not a company", even though they clearly aspire to be (and
operate) as such
You seem to have difficulty differentiating between what /is/ and what
/should/ be.
> And the fact that educational establishments are funded by the
> taxpayer should mean that they shouldn't act like companies.
IMHO it shouldn't matter /where/ the money comes from - the process of
intellectual progress should not be a "business". Period.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| "At the time, I thought C was the most elegant language and Java
| the most practical one. That point of view lasted for maybe two
| weeks after initial exposure to Lisp." ~ Constantine Vetoshev
`----
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.25.11-60.fc8
15:55:14 up 60 days, 23:38, 4 users, load average: 0.06, 0.08, 0.02
|
|
