Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Louigi Verona <louigi.verona@...>
Cc: Linux Audio User <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Friday, February 15, 2013 - 9:04 am

--f46d043c819444e68f04d5bfaac1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Louigi Verona wrote:

> If we are in a position when such "courtesy" means saying "Can I please

In a discussion of copyright, wherein the right of refusal
is enforceable by rule of law, you'd have a point. However, as a matter
only of ethics you do not lose any ability to do whatever you wish if I
refuse to grant you permission for something. You can choose to ignore my
wish if you so please.

To me, however, this all raises a question I've been meaning to ask
throughout this discussion. Why do you need to use my work in the first
place? Why can't you just whistle some other tune? Why can't you just use
some other song in your play? I would imagine the answer is because you
want to. Because something about that particular tune inspires you, or that
particular song makes you feel as though your play is better. I'm not
forcing you to have that desire. And I'm not forcing you to follow that
desire, but you will feel compelled to do so regardless. Copyright or no
copyright, you will not be free from this impulse. Your liberty to decide
how you should employ your body is constantly compromised by your own
desires, as it is for each and every one of us. I see plenty of arguments
for abolishing copyright on the grounds that it restricts fulfillment of
desires - why not abolish desire on the grounds that it restricts true
freedom of choice. The two seem about as plausible as each other to me
right now.

--f46d043c819444e68f04d5bfaac1
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

=
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Louigi Verona <louigi.verona@gmail.=
com
> wrote:
If we are in a position when such "cour=
tesy" means saying "Can I please use your tune in my play?",=
we are philosophically saying that the author has the right to decide how =
you should employ your body and your property in a certain way.
In a discussion of copyright, wherein the right of refusal is=A0e=
nforceable=A0by rule of law, you'd have a point. However, as a matter o=
nly of ethics you do not lose any ability to do whatever you wish if I refu=
se to grant you permission for something. You can choose to ignore my wish =
if you so please.=A0
To me, howe=
ver, this all raises a question I've been meaning to ask throughout thi=
s discussion. Why do you need to use my work in the first place? Why can&#3=
9;t you just whistle some other tune? Why can't you just use some other=
song in your play? I would imagine the answer is because you want to. Beca=
use something about that particular tune inspires you, or that particular s=
ong makes you feel as though your play is better. I'm not forcing you t=
o have that desire. And I'm not forcing you to follow that desire, but =
you will feel compelled to do so regardless. Copyright or no copyright, you=
will not be free from this impulse. Your liberty to decide how=A0you=A0sho=
uld employ your body is constantly compromised by your own desires, as it i=
s for each and every one of us. I see plenty of arguments for abolishing co=
pyright on the grounds that it restricts=A0fulfillment=A0of desires - why n=
ot abolish desire on the grounds that it restricts true freedom of choice. =
The two seem about as plausible as each other to me right now.

--f46d043c819444e68f04d5bfaac1--

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)