> What I am supporting is their right to protect their property. I don't
> condone illegal activities to further ANY objective, but I think that their
> objective is just. As for your comment regarding Sony's "tenuous rights to
> somebody else's product", if the artist wishes to have their music
> distributed by Sony, and they sign a contract that gives Sony the rights to
> their music, who's fault is that? Either negotiate a better contract, or
> find someone else to distribute your music (or do it yourself). The fact
> is, they go with Sony because Sony is huge and they can get a lot of
> exposure (let me translate: $$$$$$$$). The artists are out to make a little
> coin, too. Don't be so naive as to think they do not know what's going on.
>
> My point is this: there is a problem with pirating music. Sony wants to
> stop this illegal behavior. I agree with their *reasoning* behind wanting
> to stop it. A *solution* needs to be found. One that allows Sony the
> rights to their property (without violating any laws) and that does not
> infringe upon any rights of the law abiding citizens of the world.
I understand what you're saying, but this is a fundamental flaw
inherent in the entire concept of intellectual property. You cannot
own an idea, nor control its distribution. For a while our current
system worked by controlling the media on which ideas could be
distributed, but now our technology has advanced to the point where
there quite literally is no medium of distribution, unless you count
electrons. (Or photons.) This is not a flaw in our technological
system, but rather in the concept of ownable intellectual property in
general. There is no way to prevent the flow of information if you
cannot control the medium, and as technology advances, our media will
become more and more uncontrollable. Individuals and businesses who
deal in intellectual property, if they want to continue doing so
profitably, should be seriously evaluating their present and future
business models at this point and looking at what they can do to offer
services related to their current products.
Believe it or not, the open source movement is doing this right. It
recognizes that the salable value of a piece of software is not the
executable nor the source code. People who don't understand this
always say, "How are you going to make any money if you give your code
away?" That's like saying, "How are you going to make any money
running a restaurant if you let people in the door for free?"
-- Debianista!----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:14:17 EDT