linuxaudio.org

On Friday 15 February 2013 02:13:22 Al Thompson wrote:

quoted text
> On 02/15/2013 01:58 AM, Louigi Verona wrote:

> > If we are in a position when such "courtesy" 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. I maintain that by making up an idea,

> > you do not now gain property rights in everything that uses that idea.

>

> Here's where we differ.  You seem to claim that if *I* write a song on

> my own, and *YOU* want to include that song in a play or movie, that if

> I say "no," then I am deciding how you can use YOUR property.  This is

> simply not true.  You can use your property any way you want, as long as

> you don't kidnap MY property to do it.

Let's really spell out *exactly* what you are saying is happening here.
For instance I could answer like this:
It is not your property he is kidnaping. He may be making a copy of your

creation or a derivative of your creation though.
Let's say the facts in the case of the above answer are that you published a

recording of the song and he bought a copy of the CD that the song was on

from you or people you sold the copy to.
Or I could answer like this:
No,he certainly does not have a right to kidnap (actually steal) your song

from you. He should be charged with theft.
Let's say the facts in the case of the above answer are that you wrote and

recorded the song on your PC/DAW and he broke in and stole the hard disk on

which the only copy resided.
> And claiming that my refusal to

quoted text
> grant a mechanical license for my copyright work results in my somehow

> deciding how you can use YOUR BODY is gibberish.

So, he takes his body, does some work and gets paid. He goes to the store, he

buys a copy of your song and CD. He goes to another store and buys a box of

blank CDs. he goes to anotehr store and buys a PC with a CDRW drive in it. He

takes all of this home along with his body and sets everything up in his

office.
He sits down, fires up the PC and puts in the CD which he now owns which has

your song recorded on it. He uses his ripping program to rip it do his hard

disk. He then pops out that CD and pops in a blank. He tells his software to

write a copy of the songs from the CD he purchased to the blank CD he also

purchased.
You want the law to prevent him from doing this with his body and the things

he legally purchased. Correct? (Well, if this is not so, why speak of the

mechanical license here?)

quoted text
>

> A LOT of the examples you complain about are actually ABUSE of

> copyright, rather than a flaw in the concept of copyright.  It still

> seems like you believe that if someone else writes a song, that you

> honestly believe that you have superior rights over his property than he

> does.

To make any sense at all, you need to distinguish between a published work and

one that is not yet published.

quoted text
>

> Each of us "owns" his own body.  By extension, we each "own" whatever we

> produce out of thin air.  If you claim that you somehow have a right to

> what I have produced, that would mean that you believe that you own me,

> and I am reduced to a position of slavery.

Again, published or not published?
> Do you believe that you

quoted text
> would have a "right" to WHATEVER I produced?  Is there a limit??  Would

> I have to ask you to please leave me enough of my labor so that I may

> feed my family or buy new strings for my guitar, or will you provide

> those, in order than I could continue to produce things which you would

> claim to have a right to?

all the best,
drew

_______________________________________________

Linux-audio-user mailing list

Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org

http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user