Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - [permaculture] Svar: Re: Intellectual property

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Thomas Paul Jahn" <tpj@life.ku.dk>
  • To: <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [permaculture] Svar: Re: Intellectual property
  • Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 20:39:37 +0100

Isn't that the whole idea about open source?!
Leo, I very much like the point you make. And of course, we are yet living in
a time of intellectual property and we use money as our daily currency.
Therefore, I clearly don't want to blame anybody for exercising their vested
rights.
Also, I must say: The big black book is the best investment I have made since
a long time (although I bought a lot of good books lately).

On the other hand, there is some irony in it: permaculture is really the most
concrete concepts providing a real alternative to our system in terms of
independence and selfsustainability. And obviously, Bill Mollison would like
this thing to become implemented at large more than anything else. So I could
imagine that "intellectual owners" of the literature of permaculture would be
most open to share. They do already, because the book is worth severaltimes
its official priece. (Unfortunatyely, I had to pay 25% tax to the danish
government. :-()

The whole issue is probably more about showing appreciation.
-thomas

>>> Leo Brodie <leobro@comcast.net> 13-11-09 17:48 >>>
Regarding the discussion of intellectual property, I believe there's another
layer that hasn't been discussed here. It's not such a black-and-white issue.

I've written and published several books myself, and I agree that in the
current economic paradigm, the creator of the intellectual property should
have the right to profit from that work. The accepted principle is that an
author has no incentive to spend the time and energy creating the work if
someone else can give away copies for free. It's the same principle that a
farmer who builds a farm and grows food should not have someone else come in
and reap the harvest or share the harvest with others.

Although the concept of intellectual property is less than 200 years old, the
principle is a direct result of the ownership paradigm, which probably began
with the introduction of agriculture. In the current economic paradigm,
authors who want to spend a few years writing a book still need to feed
themselves and have shelter. This requires money, or at least the ownership
of land, which also requires money.

So while I side with the author in this case, I also desire to envision an
alternate world, a better world. It's often referred to as a "gift economy."
It's a world where the idea of "ownership" or "property" has no meaning.
Imagine this author lives in a world where no one owns the land, and everyone
contributes to the harvest, simply because that is our tribal nature. Now
this author is free to write a book without concern for feeding himself, but
simply out of the joy of sharing. It follows that this author would no more
think of the book as his property than is the land, or the rivers, or the air.

"Care for the earth" is inconsistent with the notion of owning it. "Care for
the people" is inconsistent with the notion that some people own the land and
others don't.

I realize this is a huge oversimplification. But I also suspect that it seems
like an oversimplification precisely because we're mired in a cultural story
that private ownership is natural. What if we had a different story, where
ownership was a bizarre idea?

- Leo Brodie
_______________________________________________
permaculture mailing list
permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Subscribe or unsubscribe here:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
Google command to search archives:
site:https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture searchstring








Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page