[cc-community] Benjamin Mako Hill on Creative Commons
zotz at 100jamz.com
Tue Aug 2 17:36:41 EDT 2005
On Tuesday 02 August 2005 03:50 pm, Greg London wrote:
> > Benjamin Mako Hill
> > Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so
> > far as society is free to use the results. --RMS
> This would be rhetoric that is not accurate to reality,
> but rather forwards an idealogy for the way the speaker
> wants things to be.
> the point of copyright and patent law is to promote
> progress in the arts and sciences.
This is for everyone. I noticed you left out a word that is included in the US
"to promote the progress of science and the useful arts, by securing, for
limited times, to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their
respective writings and discoveries."
I found this link:
I have never seen anyone discuss if there is a distinction between the arts in
general and the useful arts. Has anyone? Links please.
> As soon as Poe wrote
> "The Murders in the Rue Morgue", the idea of a murder
> mystery as a genre was immediately available to other
> writers. As soon as Bell patented the transistor,
> the idea of solid state electronics was available
> to inventors. Both are "social contributions" in the
> benefit the grant people in their immediate application,
> and in the new ideas and knowledge that the make
> available. This quote is little more than redefining
> "social contribution" to exclude types of contributions
> that someone doesn't like.
> All this talk of "ethics" and yet no acknowledgement
> that a balanced patent and copyright system is just
> as "ethical" as a team working in a FOSS project.
The problem is. Given it was a hostage scenario so long ago. The bounty was
offered. Fourteen years. Plus an extension? Something like that. Corrections
please. Now. That system must have been broken or lacking in some form as it
has morphed into what we have today. Say we agree to the hostage scenario and
set it to the forty years you propose. What is designed into the bounty
hunter system to prevent things from getting out of hand again.
Now, you always pull forty years out of thin air and it "seems" you are not
open to consider a lesser length. It also seems you are not willing to
consider the possibility of experimantal means of determining a more optimal
lenght. Is this fair or correct? (This is one of those direct questions.)
Greg, perhaps the bounty hunter analogy is not as good as you think in that if
you are having this much trouble getting people who basically agree with you
as to the problems you see and the fixes you propose to see the light, how re
you going to get those who disagree with these fundamentals to see the light?
If you would have more of a dialog, perhaps we could help refine the metaphor.
all the best,
More information about the cc-community