What is so dangerous about freeing up INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY to the masses?

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,910
238
106
Does it somehow kill intellectual growth in society if we do not reward the individual via monetary means? I, for one, feel intellectual property is over valued and its disemination thwarted by copyright and patents. This barbaric system of bounty for the "firstborn copyright" is absurd.
 

dkozloski

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
3,005
0
76
It seems simple. If someone invents something, we just beat'em up and take it away from them. After all he got the self satisfaction of doing it even though he now starves to death. Because we are incapable of accomplishing much ourselves we are entitled to his lifes work because we want it.
 

LordOfAll

Senior member
Nov 24, 1999
838
0
0
Well for starters copyrights and patents are different things.

Lets take some examples which I don't think you have thought through.

Example, Company names and logos are registered copyrights. Are you going to let anyone use any name and logo anytime they want?

Example, Sun, IBM, and Lucent ( just to name a few) all have pure research campuses where they sink a lot of money into research. Do you think these thing would exist if, say, IBM spent 100 million developing something only to have a close competator make the same thing without having to incure any research costs? Do you tink IBM could stay in business like that?

Ok now lets look at artists. Now you are an author. You write a book and sell it to a publisher. Another publisher likes the book and starts to print his own copy. After all he can do this because under your system you have no rights to it. Who do you think can sell that book cheaper, the publisher who has to pay you, or the one that doesn't?

<<Does it somehow kill intellectual growth in society if we do not reward the individual via monetary means? >>

In a word yes.
 

Finality

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,665
0
0
I think MadRat is getting frustrated with all the copyright problems that are poping up with companies like Rambus around. Unfortunately the patent office is to blame for that. They are getting flooded with ip requests.

Heck IBM filed a patent for a vibrator and won that patent :eek:.
 

DeeK

Senior member
Mar 25, 2000
700
0
0
Musicians and artists still created back when there was no copyright. They just weren't in it for the money.



<< Heck IBM filed a patent for a vibrator and won that patent >>



For the last bloody time, that wasn't an IBM patent. IBM was just hosting a server with a database of all U.S. patents back to a certain date. Patents owned by all different people and companies were in there.
 

Wingznut

Elite Member
Dec 28, 1999
16,968
2
0
So, it wouldn't bother you if you spent an ungodly amout of time developing a process/idea, and someone else just took it and ran with it? You wouldn't have a problem with just giving all your work away?
 

Vyle

Senior member
Feb 8, 2001
292
0
0
The bottom line is this: is there anyone here who would rather NOT get paid for their work?
 

BD2003

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
16,815
1
76
Its not a reward. Its subsistance. If people are going to be spending all day long to invent or discover something, it'd be nice if they could eat afterwards. People dont invent partical colliders in their free time.
 

PliotronX

Diamond Member
Oct 17, 1999
8,883
107
106


<< The bottom line is this: is there anyone here who would rather NOT get paid for their work? >>



&quot;Will work for hardware upgrades&quot;
 

DeeK

Senior member
Mar 25, 2000
700
0
0


<< So, it wouldn't bother you if you spent an ungodly amount of time developing a process/idea, and someone else just took it and ran with it? You wouldn't have a problem with just giving all your work away? >>



Do the letters BSD mean anything to you?

If not, here's the gist: The BSD license is a software/source code license that basically says &quot;Do as thou wilt&quot;. The source code is released with no strings attached. You can use that source code in a commercial product all you want with no compensation to the author. Microsoft uses BSD code in some of their programs (the file FTP.exe from Win98 contains the string &quot;Copyright (c) 1983 The Regents of the University of California.&quot; Because that code was released under the BSD license, this is perfectly legal.

So tell me, why would anyone want to release their hard work under the anarchist BSD license?

Sure, not everyone would want to use the BSD license but the way you gave your response, it looks like you think that no one would want to. That's just plain crap. There'll always be those who program or write music or whatever because they like doing it, not because they're in it for the money.
 

Dameon

Banned
Oct 11, 1999
2,117
1
0
The bigger problem I have is with companies that buy up patents specifically to bury them and make certain they never see the light of day.

For example, the oil industry has been buying patents for high-efficiency carbs and motors for years just to destroy them and make certain gas-guzzling vehicles remained the norm.
 

HannibalX

Diamond Member
May 12, 2000
9,361
2
0
Just have to add my 2 cents here:

1.) Becuause it's mine not yours. I worked hard to purchase/create whatever the property happens to be and if you want the same privilage of having it then you can work your ass off and earn it like everyone else.

2.) Becuase some things are not needed to be known by the general public. I don't want Iraq knowing the military readyness of the United States, I also don't want any yahoo to know my bank records or my will, etc.

It sounds to me that your one of those hacker types who thinks information should be free and that your &quot;on a search for knowledge&quot;. To me this = lazyness.
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,910
238
106
Lets test this theory about eating because of intellectual property...

I sell intellectual property therefore I can eat.

I eat therefore I sold intellectual property?


I don't think this idea holds true in reverse-validity test. Since it doesn't hold true then it must be fallible. I think that its probably more likely that one works for their food out of need, rather than sells intellectual property solely for their food. If that is the case then people are bullied to give up their intellectual property.

Furthermore, I don't like the idea of a corporation (a souless entity) owning the hard work of an individual solely because they were under the payroll. Sure, being paid for work is important. However, intellectual ideas are stunted by the current system of bureaucracy.

If that person experiences lucidity they should be able to freely develop the idea. In effect if the company decides to not allow that person to develop the idea specifically how they want it developed then that person should have every right to progress his/her research that they started. No strings attached.

This is why the internet society progresses so quickly. Ideas are being shared at no cost and people a thousand miles away are benefiting. In effect, since nobody owns the ideas anybody is free to develop them as they feel motivated to do so. Motivation then becomes the bottom line to the development of an idea.

Motivation, my friends, is the bottom line why you eat. One day we'll no longer need to eat and all of our ideas will be traded at zero cost. Until then, lets solve this bureaucratic fiasco so that ideas can flow without unnecessary, artificial limitations.
 

Zucchini

Banned
Dec 10, 1999
4,601
0
0
Well until we genetically engineer ambitious ppl that will push advances for tummy rubs.. its a stupid question.
 

Aboroth

Senior member
Feb 16, 2000
723
0
0


<< It sounds to me that your one of those hacker types who thinks information should be free and that your &quot;on a search for knowledge&quot;. To me this = lazyness. >>



I would appreciate it if you wouldn't misuse the word &quot;hacker&quot;. The hacker community is all about computer security and exposing holes so that they can be fixed and secret info is kept secret, not about stealing information so that everyone can find out what your shoe size is and how much you have on your credit cards. Anyone who doesn't abide by that is NOT a hacker. Find a different word, there are a lot of them.

Anyway, I see patents are one way of keeping a system alive by rewarding inventors. I think that we would be more successful if in addition to patents everyone did what they enjoyed doing and didn't just do things for the money, but that isn't how our system is set up. People do things for money and like to guarantee that their work is recognized. There isn't anything wrong with that. I wouldn't want to live in a country where something was wrong with that.
 

HannibalX

Diamond Member
May 12, 2000
9,361
2
0
/me dances around using the word hacker in the wrong context continuously.

Lord, you make is sound like it's a prestigious or sacred title, please.
 

Aboroth

Senior member
Feb 16, 2000
723
0
0
Well excuse me if I offended you, I didn't mean to. I was just a little annoyed to see yet another person describe myself and everyone I associate with as people who like to steal everyone else's information because we are lazy and apparently use an excuse such as &quot;search for knowledge&quot; to justify illegal and immoral actions. Sorry, but that is not the case. It is also insulting.
The term &quot;hacker&quot; has been slandered repeatedly by the media and is now used by many people as a derogatory term. That really sucks. I am just trying to improve the situation somewhat. I guess it isn't helping.
 

HannibalX

Diamond Member
May 12, 2000
9,361
2
0
Terms take on new meaning over time and also gain and lose respect. The day and age of a hacker being anything good is overwith, becuase too many people have missued the powers hackers have to do wrong things, such as destruction of property, breaking and entering, theft of property and assault - therefore the word hacker is associated with people who do these kinds of things.

I hold little respect for anyone with this title, and most (not all but 99%) of the so called &quot;true&quot; hackers out there still break the law by &quot;finding securirty holes&quot; and do not work for software or hardware development companies. Likewise they are not represented by or affiliated in any way with these companies. Real &quot;hackers&quot; live in a child hood fantasy where they are above the system, searching for knowledge and thinking that information should be free and that everyone around them should be so greatful and humbled by their works.

Wake up.
 

Soccerman

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,378
0
0
Madrat, I totally agree with you. Open Source man!

why do I agree with you? well, what good is it when 20 people are working on a concept and get to a level where they don't think they can get any higher. Then the idea is nearly killed, because no-one else has been told about it, and cannot mull over it.

the more people you have thinking about it, the more likely you are to find a breakthrough. it's like the reverse of hacking MS products, most people here are only surprised when it DOESN'T happen, becuase so many people work on it (whether for good or evil, that's for others to argue).

Though shalt not steal: A commandment in Christianity, and a good one that applies to TODAY'S laws and way of life. HOWEVER, if somehow most (if not every idea) ideas were free for everyone to think about (not necessarily talking about ART, but about science and technology), then there wouldn't be nearly as much to STEAL now would there?

Christianity teaches alot about GIVING. Do unto others as you would have them do to YOU. if today these types of ideals were common, the only thing you could then steal would be someone, but why would you do that, if everyone followed that Godlen Rule, (do unto others as you would have them do unto you).

sure some people would be greedy, which would obviously cause problems, but that's alot better then the secretive society we live in now.

personally, I'd love it if this kind of rule was adopted by everyone. why? well being a often curious person, I'd be able to access information about the fields I'm interested in: Science, Technology, and Politics (though Politics would be alot different in that kind of world).

Science, becuase much of the time when reading magazines like Scientific American, I'm able to read quite complicated ideas about the universe, yet cannot quite comprehend them, becuase it costs money to get to a level high enough to understand these things. There may or may not already be SOME of that information free on the Internet, but not necessarily enough! Then when I CAN comprehend these ideas, I can try to develope them further. The neat thing about science today, is that much of the time you are free to show your results/conclusions to others.

Technology today, on the other hand, is alot more secretive. just look at the computer industry today. we understand a few basics when it comes to video cards, CPU's, and the like, but for people to really help out, they first need to understand how logic gates work, and things like that. then they need to come up with ways to use logic gates to render 3D graphics more efficiently.

if you eliminate one costly step in that procuess, the LEARNING THE BASICS part, so that you can now access it for free, you increase the number of people thinking about this by alot.

a perfect example of me not knowing todays technology well enough (though this information is pretty much free), is when I came up with an idea on making heat exchangers more efficient, by making the extreme hot part of the exchanger (the beginning or end, depending on what the exchanger would be used for) be in contact with the partly warmed up part that was warmed by the cooler end of the heat source (this explanation is kind of confusing).

If no-one had taught me HOW heat exchangers work, and this form of the device wasn't invented yet, we would be literally wasting much more MASSIVE amounts of energy (Nuclear reactors use heat exchangers).

Of course, this example is much too basic for this concept to not be thought of eventually, the easier it is to get to a level of understanding of current technology, the more that we can accomplish with it.
 

Bleep

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
3,972
0
0
Dameon:
Firstly I think this discussion belongs in another forum but here goes. You Sir &quot;Dameon&quot; are full of it. All patents for mechanical devices are open for public view no matter who ownes the rights. Do you really think that a automobile or engine manifacture would let something like that get away from them?
Cant remember who posted it but they stated that people made music before patents. When was that? Even in old england and france and all europe had laws concerning ownership of Music scores.
Bleep

 

jaywallen

Golden Member
Sep 24, 2000
1,227
0
0
Reverse-validity test? Puh-leeze! Talk about a little knowledge being dangerous! It is often said that mathematics is the worst-taught subject. Mathematics is a subset of logic, which most certainly is the worst-taught subject.