On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 02:23:00PM -0400, John Pedersen wrote:
>
> >If you won't stand to protect Reebok's IP rights, don't sqwak
> >when a loved one is ill and your health insurance says
> >'tough'. It is the same bundle of rights being protected.
>
> Yes, there are some IP rights being trampled. But I don't know
> if *I* should "stand to protect Reebok's IP rights".
>
> They chose to shaft the American workers, and send their
> jobs overseas. That was their right.
>
Tit for tat, eh?
The point here was that if you fail to protect the property rights of
others, you can't very well complain when your property rights are
violated. Both sides of the same coin.
Shifting this a bit, although I loathe Michael Moore and think he's a
despiccable human being, I would fight for his right to speak his mind
(1st Amendment). It doesn't matter whether I agree with Reebok's choice
of location and work force; I'm still obligated to stand up for their
property rights if I wish to keep mine intact. From a legal perspective,
this is like selective enforcement. We prosecute some people for
violations of the the law, but for people we like (OJ? Kobe Bryant?) we
look the other way. That's not justice, but caprice.
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:26:54 EDT