DIYbanter - View Single Post

John Fields wrote:
On 25 Apr 2006 09:05:45 -0700, wrote:

wrote:
John Fields wrote:
The fact is, you've done yourself in twice and you don't even know
it. Here's the original:

"Recognizing the originator of an idea is not nearly the same thing
as granting them ownership of the idea or its use as virtual
property."

And here's its second even more heinous incarnation, from above:

"recognizing an inventor need not include granting them the right to
use the invention"

That's your statement not mine!

Specifically, by dropping the "as virtual property" from my original,
John constructed a new statement with a nearly opposite meaning of the
original, then fradulently attributed his new statement to me so that
he could argue against an outrageous straw man, rather than the
reasoned arguments I actually presented.

---
I misread your second statement and trimmed it for convenience. I
apologize for that.

However, my position is still that the idea is inherently the
property of its originator, who should be free to do with it what he
chooses. Give it away, sell it, rent it, whatever.

Your position (if you'll admit to having one) seems to be that the
idea doesn't belong to its originator, but to some sort of
collective with the power to determine who owns the idea and how
it'll be used.

Thanks John for your responses to these perhaps radical ideas.

One more comment:

Under IP laws, an idea does not belong to its originator, but belongs
to whoever is favored by (who has paid) the governors. The originator,
other people who came up with it (what idea has ever been had by only a
single person?), those who appreciate the work and would build on it,
and those who could use the idea to better the economy, are out of
luck, at least in the lands under power of the crown - I mean the
forementioned governernors.