Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: James Harkins <jamshark70@...>
Cc: <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Thursday, February 14, 2013 - 9:44 pm

--14dae9340c0fd098a604d5b628a6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

"If you create an intellectual product, and I want to do something with it
--
distribute it, or create a new work based on the original -- common decency
calls for me to *ask permission*. To do it anyway without asking is rude or
disrespectful, maybe even dishonest."

This is where we differ, at least on the surface of it. I think that it is
unethical
to make people ask you permission after you publicly released something.
When I release a tune or a story or an invention, I do not aim to become a
tyrant, who, by virtue of his work now has the world grant him a positive
obligation.

The common decency you speak about is not common to me. To me making
people asking permission is being a jerk.

I release all my works under a CC0 license, although I would gladly live in
a
non-copyright world, where I would not need to state any conditions. I see
no
justification to make people ask me. They can do so, but they are not
required
so.

And what is the reason to release something into the culture without making
it
free to become part of that culture by default? I really don't get it. To
me this
is like handing someone a candy, but never really letting it go.

How I have arrived to such a view is a whole different story, of course,
and we can
debate the arguments I have, although I would take it off LAU maybe. It is
sort of
music related though...

rests on
an intuitive notion of "well this is wrong" which you seem to think
everyone should
share. Well, I don't.

Anyway, if you are interested, we can debate, if not, I did enjoy learning
your
position on the matter and consider this to have been a very pleasant
conversation on
a pretty complicated philosophical issue.

L.V.

--14dae9340c0fd098a604d5b628a6
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

"If you create an intellectual product, and I want to do something wit=
h it --
distribute it, or create a new work based on the original -- common decency=

calls for me to *ask permission*. To do it anyway without asking is rude or=

disrespectful, maybe even dishonest."This is where we differ, =
at least on the surface of it. I think that it is unethicalto make peop=
le ask you permission after you publicly released something.When I rele=
ase a tune or a story or an invention, I do not aim to become a
tyrant, who, by virtue of his work now has the world grant him a positiveobligation.The common decency you speak about is not common to me=
. To me makingpeople asking permission is being a jerk.I releas=
e all my works under a CC0 license, although I would gladly live in a
non-copyright world, where I would not need to state any conditions. I see =
nojustification to make people ask me. They can do so, but they are not=
requiredso.And what is the reason to release something into th=
e culture without making it
free to become part of that culture by default? I really don't get it. =
To me thisis like handing someone a candy, but never really letting it =
go.How I have arrived to such a view is a whole different story, of=
course, and we can
debate the arguments I have, although I would take it off LAU maybe. It is =
sort ofmusic related though...From what I have seen so far is that =
your own counter-argument basically rests onan intuitive notion of &quo=
t;well this is wrong" which you seem to think everyone should
share. Well, I don't.Anyway, if you are interested, we can deba=
te, if not, I did enjoy learning yourposition on the matter and conside=
r this to have been a very pleasant conversation ona pretty complicated=
philosophical issue.
L.V.

--14dae9340c0fd098a604d5b628a6--

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, James Harkins, (Thu Feb 14, 2:28 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, drew Roberts, (Sun Feb 17, 10:13 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Louigi Verona, (Thu Feb 14, 9:44 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, michael noble, (Fri Feb 15, 12:25 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, drew Roberts, (Fri Feb 15, 2:19 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, michael noble, (Fri Feb 15, 3:12 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Rustom Mody, (Fri Feb 15, 5:06 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Louigi Verona, (Fri Feb 15, 6:58 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, michael noble, (Fri Feb 15, 9:04 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, drew Roberts, (Fri Feb 15, 2:35 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, michael noble, (Fri Feb 15, 3:18 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, drew Roberts, (Sun Feb 17, 11:01 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Louigi Verona, (Fri Feb 15, 10:43 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Louigi Verona, (Fri Feb 15, 10:44 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Simon Wise, (Fri Feb 15, 7:42 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Louigi Verona, (Fri Feb 15, 7:45 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Al Thompson, (Fri Feb 15, 7:13 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, drew Roberts, (Sun Feb 17, 10:26 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Louigi Verona, (Fri Feb 15, 7:31 am)