DIYbanter - View Single Post

On 24 Apr 2006 14:43:33 -0700, wrote:

John Fields wrote:

Beowulf

You seem to think that we still live in that time. We don't. Fast
forward about a thousand years into the future from then and it
becomes apparent that the need for copyright has come about
precisely because of the need for artists to be protected from the
wolves who would otherwise prey upon them.

I assume by wolves, you mean record companies?

---
No, pirates.

Artists enter into deals with record companies. The deals may not
be to the advantage of the artists, but that's just the result of
the artist's ineptitude at business.
---

You're first mistake is to assume that the way things have turned out
is the only positive path of development that could have occured.

---
It's not "you're" it's "your", and why would you assume that?

The fact that I support patenting and trademarking give you no
information whatever about my thoughts as to the possibility of
alternate development paths existing.
---

Wolves like you, for instance, who think it's your God-given right
to copy anyone's works and disseminate them in any way you see fit,
under the pretense that by so doing you enrich our lives.

Your second mistake it putting words in my mouth. How do you know my
views?

---
You're mistaken, again.
I haven't put words in your mouth, I've made clear what kind of
person I think you are.
---

I haven't actually expressed any - I merely pointed out counterexamples
to your argument.

---
That's not true. Your:

"Rather ignorant assumptions you are making, considering that all of
your examples were well established traditions BEFORE the became
considered ownable "intellectual property" "

sounds to me like your view, at that particular point in time, was
that I had made an ignorant assumption.
---

In fact, all you're really interested in being able to do is graze,
free range, on what's out there for your own benfit. That kind of
attitude and behavior can only contribute to the theft of resources
from the artist, quite conceivably lowering his output and
diminishing any enrichment our lives might attain from that source.

Third mistake: continuing off on a tangent

---
LOL, everything's a mistake when it doesn't go exactly like you want
it to, isn't it?
---

Other than the Nazi aspect of it, I don't understand what it is with
people like you who think it's OK to take other people's work and
deal with it as if it were your own, but I'm sure that if the shoe
was on the other foot and you had anything worth protecting, you and
your ilk would be the first to cry wolf.

Fourth mistake: triggering Godwin to try to end an argument you realize
you're loosing...

---
Another error. I'm not trying to end anything, I'm loosing an
argument on you which you can't seem to cope with and keep whining
"mistake" instead of countering logically. In this instance, _you_
were the one, not I, who cited Godwin in an attempt to stop the
argument instead of offering proof that your attitude isn't
Nazi-like.
---

Fifth mistake: assuming the present status quo will persist.

---
What makes you think I assume that?
---

For software and music recording it clearly won't. In the case of
software, because the industry is rapidly outgrowing traditional
publisher/monopoly concepts of copyright. In the case of music
recordings, because copyright is so divorced from it's alleged purpose
that an increasing segment of the public would no longer support the
law if it were put to referendum. That doesn't mean that the
alternative to the present system is no system; but it does mean that
thiings will continue to change.

---
Platitudes and opinions. Blah, blah, blah...

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer