[oclug] 16-year-old technology obsolete while 916-year-old tech lives on

[Francis J. A. Pinteric]

On Sun, 3 Mar 2002 20:18:31 -0500 (EST)
"David F. Skoll" <dfs at roaringpenguin.com> wrote:
> 
> Unless we radically change course and reevaluate the whole notion of
> "intellectual property", we're going to be screwed over by
> corporations and lawmakers, and an enormous part of humanity's
> heritage will be lost.

I'm wondering also how many people realize the intimate link between
so-called "intellectual property" and our right to privacy? Corporations
insist that any and all data they lay claim to is under their absolute
control whatever form that data takes, whether it be in the form of
computer programmes or confidential information about you and me. They
expect payment for it's use yet are not prepared to have to compensate
others for it. They claim any information collected about you, from
whatever source, belongs to them and won't even let you see what they
have, even if mandated by the law.

An early form of this hypocracy can be found in the media and the
misplaced notion of the "freedom of the press." The media expect to be
able to report "news" and expect to be paid to deliver it. Yet they mostly
refuse to pay sources, and those who do are usually excoriated for
imploying unethical journalistic practices. To the news media, there is no
such thing as privacy. Even in this country, where people's privacy rights
are generally being respected by the media, is only by convention.

"Intellectual property" exists only if there is also the right to privacy.
Without the basic right to protect your information, you cannot have
either.

>>>--fja->

-- 
Imagination is the eye of the soul.
 -- Joubert.