Re: Patents, Royalties and other Scams...???

In article <dhuvlh$cs2$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rob
<removethispatchoulian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> >
> > 'Copyright' appears and is owned by the author as soon as the work is
> > created. The author may assign/rent/sell/permit/etc various
> > copyrights, but that is a matter for them. If they have sold or rented
> > rights, then the body or person who obtained the rights would have the
> > relevant control.
> >
> Yes, OK, I sort of know that. It's just *I think* copyright does more to
> stifle innovation, reward and dissemination than it creates. It's just
> my view, and I think you disagree, and that's fine.

That is really a matter of how people choose to use it.

> > The above is fine with me. It means the author decides if they want to
> > give work away, or charge for it, etc. Their work, their choice.
> > Otherwise, why should they bother in the first place?
> >

> That's a fettered choice.

In what way? The author decides how their work may be deployed or used.

it is only 'fettered' so far as someone else is concerned. e.g. if they
want the work for free, but the author expects payment. However in such
cases I'm afraid my sympathy tends to be with the author.

> >
> >
> > I regard it as a moral right of the author, and hence expect the law
> > to accord with that.

> I think when you use the words 'moral right' it's necessary to look at
> the intent of the perpetrator (for want of a better label) - if someone
> is using something that isn't theirs, and attributes that use explicitly
> (names the author) or implicitly (downloads a song), and no harm comes
> from it (beyond perhaps a dented author's ego) I see no moral problem.

I do, since the work is not theirs to treat in such a way. There may be
'harm'. The author may be denied payment. They may find the way that the
work is being distributed affects their reputation. e.g. They may find it
harder to sell other work as anyone who might have bought may think, "Why
bother to pay him for it when if I wait someone else will let me have a
pirate copy for nothing?" There may also be 'harm' to people who pay for a
pirated version when they might have got a cheaper or better one by paying
the author.

I can appreciate that theft is attractive to the thief, and that people
like to think they are "causing no harm". But the point is that this is
not a decision they are entitiled to make.

> > fair enough, but in a capatalist/market system the author has to sell
> > his work, just as do others.
> >

> They don't have to.

Indeed. It is the author's choice, and then a matter for others if they
wish to pay or go without.


> > However I am also concerned about publishers and organisations who
> > make copies and distribute them *to make money* without consulting the
> > author or getting permission. This goes on, and is piracy or theft. It
> > steals from the author who might otherwise get payment for their work.
> > It steals from the purchasers who are being tricked into paying for
> > what they might have got at lesser (or zero) cost.
> >

> Well, that's a rather different argument and is simply exploitation -
> although I would imagine from your comments above (**) legal redress
> exists, absence of legal aid notwithstanding.

It does in principle. However trying to sue someone (civil matter) in a
distant country with different laws may be somewhat problematic.

Until recently, countries like Russia and China (and some others) simply
declined to recognise copyright, and freely pirated textbooks, etc. Indeed,
at one time India did a lot of this, and so did the USA! By denying the
author and assigned publisher the trade, the price for those who *did* pay
was higher. Thus both the author and those who bought the 'legitimate'
version were 'harmed'. This still goes on a great deal in various parts of
the world. In some cases the texts were hastily copied and hence had
serious errors or omissions, thus misleading the readers. Also potentially
quite harmful.

The problem is that once you start to try and excuse such piracy on the
basis that "I want a copy and I don't want to pay what the copyright
holders are asking" then you may do 'harm' regardless of believing
otherwise...

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Patents, Royalties and other Scams...???
    ... The author may assign/rent/sell/permit/etc various copyrights, but that is a matter for them. ... If they have sold or rented rights, then the body or person who obtained the rights would have the relevant control. ... the intent of the perpetrator - if someone is using something that isn't theirs, and attributes that use explicitly or implicitly, and no harm comes from it I see no moral problem. ... There may also be 'harm' to people who pay for a ...
    (uk.rec.audio)
  • Re: Phil S. is an old fart
    ... if i could pay for cubase, i would, but since i can't ... offer free trial downloads (don't know about cubase) to address this issue. ... This is a matter of character judgment. ... I steal my neighbours car, or a car off the lot for that ...
    (alt.guitar.amps)
  • Re: Big Dig Disaster Website
    ... Doesn't matter whether you love them or hate them, ... should pay. ... I hope we are like western Europe in 10 years. ...
    (misc.transport.road)
  • asleep tropical situation in Mustafa Dindars frontier
    ... It might park the current mammal and harm it ... If the loose unions can sink that, ... completions view no matter how ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: BBC tell whoppers on downloads
    ... Rubbish. ... And you can rest assured I do think about the matter, just not in a way you ... with attempts to apply contract law and technical restrictions to enforce ... Volunteers can produce it without pay if they wish ...
    (uk.legal)