Re: Asimov Site

["Byron Q. Desnoyers Winmill" <wbdesnoy@ucalgary.ca>]

John wrote:
> I want those who hold copyrights to act more like adults, less like
> barbarians. I want them to realize that it doesn't have to be 100% or 0%.
> They seem to have a siege mentality, where if they don't wipe out all
> piracy, they will be bankrupt in 3 months. This simply isn't true. That
> attitude threatens every fair use principle there is, and in many cases
> equates to zero economic gain.

But piracy is a criminal activity, so the "siege mentality" applies.  What
we should be fighting are the laws; laws which dictate that the development
of an idea, and its implementation, brings "property rights" for an
inordinate amount of time.  By an inordinate amount of time, I am refering
to the period between intellectual property being of no commercial value to
the owner and when the copyright expires.  It is in this period that
intellectual property becomes destroyed, may it be careless or malicious.

This is not the type of problem which we solve through petty crimes (of
piracy), nor is it solved by submitting to the law and asking authors for
permission.  We need to make it known to the people who write the laws,
and pass the bills into law, that there is a big problem with the current
situation.  This is why we see great efforts going into GPLed software,
a rejection of many copyright privilages by the *authors*.  This is why
piracy, particularly of certain media (like music), is so bad.

Those who are choosing to defend copyright policy are right in one sad
respect: this is a property issue where pirates are in violation of the
law.  This doesn't mean that that is the way things should be, but it does
mean that we who disagree with the law should fight it with more than
faceless piracy.

I, for one, would like to think that concepts are more than property.
Property which can be destroyed by carelessness or by whim, being lost to
the people who still care about them -- or simply being lost to the future.

Byron.