Which Is More Important? Ownership Of Ideas... Or Community, Knowledge & Learning?
from the some-questions dept
My wonderful sister sent over the following quote on plagiarism vs. a community of knowledge and scholarship by famed literary critic F.O. Matthiessen, from his classic book, American Renaissance:"During the course of this long volume I have undoubtedly plagiarized from many sources--to use the ugly term that did not bother Shakespeare's age. I doubt whether any criticism or cultural history has ever been written without such plagiary, which inevitably results from assimilating the contributions of your countless fellow-workers, past and present. The true function of scholarship as a society is not to stake out claims on which others must not trespass, but to provide a community of knowledge in which others may share."Good stuff. Too bad so few still seem to feel the same way.
-F.O. Matthiessen, American Renaissance 1941
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: f.o. matthiessen, knowledge, learning, plagiarism, scholarship
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
nanos gigantum humeris insidentes
Goes right to your point... if we had to start from scratch every day, and not learn from others success (or, more importantly, the mistakes of others), we'd still be in caves. It is only through what was passed to us that we have a better tomorrow.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: nanos gigantum humeris insidentes
I've learned how to tie up endings and how to create suspense. I've learned what some would say is the formula to progressing certain aspects of characters using similar devices from other works of fiction. If authors and publishers lock down those devices/formulas, then I'm sure I'd come up with new ways to accomplish those tasks; however, there would be a lot of failures before hitting on something that was sure to entertain or maybe even make sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: nanos gigantum humeris insidentes
In these cases, if the first person to pass that bridge puts a toll on it after passing, the rest of us are forced to either pay, or find inferior routes.
Consider it like bridge-building in the real world. There are natural locations for bridges, typically in narrows between two land masses. Thing Golden Gate, Chesapeake, the Chunnel, etc. What if somebody locked up the "idea" of putting a bridge in these locations?
Saying "Either pay me for my great idea, or just build your bridge somewhere else" severely limits subsequent bridging, either by a tax on the best location, or forcing sub-optimal routings.
What many on the pro-IP side seem to think is that there are unlimited solutions to problems, so if you don't want to license someones existing work just invent your own. Yet I don't think this is how the world works. There are not multiple solutions to building a wheel, once the circle is locked up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: nanos gigantum humeris insidentes
Example, a toll bridge. You can get a patent on the payment system (automated systems that catch the coins in mid air, example), and their design, but you cannot patent the idea of a toll.
Same with bridges - you can patent / copyright the specific design of a bridge (and even that is questionable), but you cannot patent the idea of a bridge or the placement of it. You might be able to get a patent on a really nifty neat-ox gizmo that can calculate the exact perfect location for a bridge, but it doesn't stop someone from doing the same work in a different way.
Mike is pretty agressive here with implying that ideas can and have been patent, which is just not true. If someone comes up with X, you cannot duplicate X, but if you arrive at X using different underlying methods, you are not in violation of their patent. Thus there are 4000+ mouse trap patents, because the simple idea "trap mouse" isn't patent - just various systems designed to do it.
Thus, all of your examples are sort of meaningless, because you are confusing a general idea with specific designs or systems.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: nanos gigantum humeris insidentes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: nanos gigantum humeris insidentes
Idea: Boy wizard goes to a school for wizards, learns to use a wand, and faces a magical foe.
Expression: Harry Potter goes to Hogwarts and faces Voldemort.
The former is an idea that anyone can use. The latter is a specific expression of ideas. The former is not protectable. The latter is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: nanos gigantum humeris insidentes
I'm not talking about building bridges nor bridge design at all.
The "narrows" I mention like the Golden Gate are a metaphor for the easiest, most obvious, inevitably discovered best method to cross from A to B. If the first guy to think of building that orange bridge across the span hadn't though of it, someone else would probably have come up with the same solution later on.
Similar to the fact that there are logical, inevitable discoveries for the best placement of bridges, there are logical, inevitable discoveries for the best solutions to many advances in the tech, music, or design world. This is debatable for sure, but we've seen evidence pile up, since so many inventions are pursued in parallel at different times, like the airplane, the steam engine, some naturally pleasing melodies, etc. Of course, first to patent wins in our world.
Perhaps, like bridge locations, there is a natural solution to the problem of "a method for sending email to a wireless device", "a method to click on a website to purchase a good", or others. This is what you call the expression of the idea. I argue that locking up an expression may not be a good thing, if that expression were an inevitable solution, and would promptly be discovered by somebody else in the absence of the first inventor. If it's inevitable, or a natural solution, then we don't need patents to spur its creation. Free market rewards should be compensation enough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
@AJB: We never start from zero. Even if everything in the universe was patented, copyrighted, and trademarked, we would still have use of the end products, which would spur intelligent people to find new ways to do something (creativity sparked!). Even under the horrible, terrible, massively restrictive rules that are dragging mankind down, we have still made more advanced in the last 40 years than mankind made in the 100 before that, and probably the 1000 before that.
Quite simply, when you look at the evidence,it doesn't support the concept that productivity or the search for knowledge is limited or hobbled, quite the opposite. 100 years ago, we didn't have even penicillin, now we are decoding the human genome.
Not bad for a group of people restrained by the overwhelming weight of the shackles of copyright, patent, and trademarks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If anything you have proven the point of the person you responded to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Both, of course.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
----------------------
You are forgetting "find a superior route".
"What if somebody locked up the "idea" of putting a bridge in these locations?"
----------------------
Straw man.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]