#4 is what I like to call Idea Neutrality, or just Neutrality. Idea Neutrality says it's ok to infringe on someone's patent as long as it's innocent -- no plagiarism.
" The guests were brought one after another and introduced to her.
As she shook hands with each she took her hand away and laid her
fingers lightly against Miss Sullivan’s lips, who spoke against them
the person’s name. When a name was difficult, Miss Sullivan not only
spoke it against Helen’s fingers but spelled it upon Helen’s hand with
her own fingers – stenographically, apparently for the swiftness of
the operation was suggestive of that.…
" After a couple of hours spent very pleasantly, some one asked if
Helen would remember the feel of the hands of the company after this
considerable interval of time, and be able to discriminate the hands
and name the possessors of them. Miss Sullivan said “Oh she will have
no difficulty about that.” So the company filed past, shook hands in
turn, and with each handshake Helen greeted the owner of the hand
pleasantly and spoke the name that belonged to it without hesitation."
Wouldn't it be just dandy if our own works were as carefully questioned and examined as a handshake with Hellen Keller? Innocent plagiarism is protected by Word Neutrality. We agree everything we create has a sense of character that reflects on our entire life. We're putting everything one may attribute to us into a single piece. I think Twain only wanted to keep a copyright cemented in stone as far as it made up his character, not his words. I think we need to stop thinking of copyright extensions as a bad thing. It's patent extensions that we need to worry about. Patents don't consider character, only facts. The fact remains though; just who copied from whom? This is what I like so much about the GNU Public License. Everything's documented. Expand that paradigm into commit logs, then we have a highly detailed history of programming in general. If that's the case, then we should have every tool to figure out just whom we have copied from.
For every handshake with Hellen Keller we have poetry and words. You can't uncopyright that.
"Intellectual property" is what I like to call a dirty word. A concept I've worked on is "Word Neutrality" and it says it's ok to stumble across some dirty word, as long as it's innocent. An example is a child cursing innocently, while repeating what Dad always says.
Everyone has their own dirty words, although most are more common. Homer once stretched his neck out of the car window to yell at someone walking down the street -- "NEEEEEEEEEEEERD." That's a nerdist -- someone prejudice against nerds. "NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERD" is a dirty word in my opinion because it's misused; it has a bad connotation, except when used innocently, not knowing that I take offense to being called a nerd. (I don't really get offended by it; this is just an example.)
Do Communists really all drive the same exact car? Nobody gets a different one? Surely they can choose a color. No fame competitors involved? What about an entirely free society, where education is a right and not a privilege for the underprivileged. Where you choose your schools based on fame and notoriety -- just like art. That's Art. College students often take up the task of learning what exactly Art means. I can't recall to be honest, but I know that the fashion industry is an industry based on popularity. It's no different than art. And it's no different with software. Google and Facebook are popular. That's what drives them. We're not forced to use them. We choose them because that's where everyone else went.
The Internet's evolving, and the power of awards threatens to cash in with unfair advantages based on flawed economy-buster tactics propelled by greed alone. Competition is what creates jobs. The Fashion industry thrives because of Fame. There are no gatekeepers preventing you from adding ruffles to your design without first paying some ruthless royalty.
The power of Fame will always prevail even with all the detrimental legal battles going on. We have Microsoft claiming they own the rights to vital aspects of skinning a cat regardless of the unique qualities that build character another competitor might bring.
In the Entertainment industry Awards are at the end of the show -- not at the starting line.
Neutrality
Hellen Keller's handshake
" The guests were brought one after another and introduced to her.
As she shook hands with each she took her hand away and laid her
fingers lightly against Miss Sullivan’s lips, who spoke against them
the person’s name. When a name was difficult, Miss Sullivan not only
spoke it against Helen’s fingers but spelled it upon Helen’s hand with
her own fingers – stenographically, apparently for the swiftness of
the operation was suggestive of that.…
" After a couple of hours spent very pleasantly, some one asked if
Helen would remember the feel of the hands of the company after this
considerable interval of time, and be able to discriminate the hands
and name the possessors of them. Miss Sullivan said “Oh she will have
no difficulty about that.” So the company filed past, shook hands in
turn, and with each handshake Helen greeted the owner of the hand
pleasantly and spoke the name that belonged to it without hesitation."
Wouldn't it be just dandy if our own works were as carefully questioned and examined as a handshake with Hellen Keller? Innocent plagiarism is protected by Word Neutrality. We agree everything we create has a sense of character that reflects on our entire life. We're putting everything one may attribute to us into a single piece. I think Twain only wanted to keep a copyright cemented in stone as far as it made up his character, not his words. I think we need to stop thinking of copyright extensions as a bad thing. It's patent extensions that we need to worry about. Patents don't consider character, only facts. The fact remains though; just who copied from whom? This is what I like so much about the GNU Public License. Everything's documented. Expand that paradigm into commit logs, then we have a highly detailed history of programming in general. If that's the case, then we should have every tool to figure out just whom we have copied from.
For every handshake with Hellen Keller we have poetry and words. You can't uncopyright that.
Dirty words
Everyone has their own dirty words, although most are more common. Homer once stretched his neck out of the car window to yell at someone walking down the street -- "NEEEEEEEEEEEERD." That's a nerdist -- someone prejudice against nerds. "NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERD" is a dirty word in my opinion because it's misused; it has a bad connotation, except when used innocently, not knowing that I take offense to being called a nerd. (I don't really get offended by it; this is just an example.)
Them Awards
The Internet's evolving, and the power of awards threatens to cash in with unfair advantages based on flawed economy-buster tactics propelled by greed alone. Competition is what creates jobs. The Fashion industry thrives because of Fame. There are no gatekeepers preventing you from adding ruffles to your design without first paying some ruthless royalty.
The power of Fame will always prevail even with all the detrimental legal battles going on. We have Microsoft claiming they own the rights to vital aspects of skinning a cat regardless of the unique qualities that build character another competitor might bring.
In the Entertainment industry Awards are at the end of the show -- not at the starting line.
Skinning a Cat
To which he replied, "But there is more than one way to do that."
She retorts, "That's the beauty of patents."
He doesn't get it.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Scott.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt