tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post943399238353794135..comments2024-03-18T17:10:35.838+00:00Comments on The IPKat: The sleep of reason: a word on democracy and copyright legislationVerónica Rodríguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-8104138166830737562012-01-20T11:07:34.560+00:002012-01-20T11:07:34.560+00:00I'm not sure I agree that since action and ina...I'm not sure I agree that since action and inaction don't advance debate, they are not part of democracy. Likewise, that those who take action on behalf of a cause are in some way delegitimsed because that action also calls attention to them. <br /><br />Look at the Kat, which has been tireless in discussing the issue of unified European patents - and not shy of saying where things are going wrong. In so doing, the site and the herd of Kats behind it have achieved a greater readership and some degree of fame. Does this nullify the discussion? Degrade it? I don't think so; it's something that can't be easily avoided and can be beneficial. <br /><br />As the editor of a commercial journalistic website, I've run campaigns in the past on issues we feel strongly about. The primary reason for doing this is a strong conviction that it is a responsible, ethical and necessary part of being in journalism in the first place. But I have the freedom to use company resources in such a way because campaigning is seen by those who ultimately control the money here as good for the brand.Rupert Goodwinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16823454543504061815noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-83092208628566492212012-01-20T09:08:22.160+00:002012-01-20T09:08:22.160+00:00I feel like I'm flogging a dead horse here, bu...I feel like I'm flogging a dead horse here, but just want to point out another reason that cuts to the heart of why the analogy is simply inappropriate. Jeremy wrote:<br />"...they did indeed raise awareness of the fact that there are many people who have a genuine and sincere grievance against the social and economic policies of successive British governments, the mode of police interaction with youth and ethnic minorities and the effect of local planning permission on traditional shopping centres"<br />And in doing so suggested that the reason the looters looted, was because they wanted to raise awareness of their 'grievance'. All the evidence shows that in fact the people who looted were opportunistic recidivists, who took advantage of a perceived break in law and order. Although the reason for their situation may (or may not) be due to government policy, they weren't looting by way of protest, they were looting because they wanted a new tv without paying for it.<br /><br />As the looters' main aim wasn't to send a political message (regardless of whether or not such a message was sent), the analogy with wikipedia is simply untenable. <br /><br />'Slightly amused' above made the point perfectly, in fewer words than me :-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-84687137128760288512012-01-20T01:45:30.672+00:002012-01-20T01:45:30.672+00:00We ALL copy. That is how life works. Any exceptio...We ALL copy. That is how life works. Any exception to this is that which is granted by the state. <br /><br />Copying is different from theft and the comparison can never be made with rational argument. Graham seems to believe that what is his is his and should be protected at all costs.<br /><br />Simple answer: Keep it secret and no-one will ever copy it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-63374361566018118762012-01-19T23:34:52.085+00:002012-01-19T23:34:52.085+00:00The problem with relying on tradition (as Graham B...The problem with relying on tradition (as Graham Barker seems to be) is that we are no longer in a traditional situation. People accept 'you want it, you pay for it' in relation to physical objects, because there is an obvious cost involved in mass producing and distributing them. This isn't true when taking about files. When duplication and distribution costs are effectively zero, people don't see why they should pay, and 'we've always done it this way' isn't sufficient argument to change people's minds.Andrew Robinsonhttp://www.pirateparty.org.uknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-25058508803462467342012-01-19T22:38:45.265+00:002012-01-19T22:38:45.265+00:00"For the average private inventor without pot..."For the average private inventor without pots of spare money, the cost of a patent can be massive and out of all proportion to any benefits. Broadly: <br />• You have to pay to be recognised as the owner of your own invention. <br />• Worse, you have to pay separately in each country in which you want to be recognised as its owner. <br />• Worse still, you have to pay – again to each separate country – annual renewal fees after Year 5 to keep your patent in force. As an added insult, the renewal fee increases over time. <br />• You have to pay any translation fees required by individual countries. These are not cheap, as we’ll see in due course.<br />"<br /><br />From Graham's website.<br /><br />You have to Pay, pay, pay. Worse still you have to keep on paying!<br /><br />"In other words, I accept the ‘You want it, you pay for it’ rule of trade but have flexibility in applying it."<br /><br />Flexibility how? Do you mean you don't pay, but someone else pays for you? Looks like thhe looting analogy has found a home.<br /><br />You've been caught out Graham.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-1383173179418254362012-01-19T22:29:26.304+00:002012-01-19T22:29:26.304+00:00Then Graham, you must accept that those SMEs shoul...Then Graham, you must accept that those SMEs should stop whinging or invest properly in their businesses. But, no, all you do is whinge about the cost of IP and how it should be funded by govt. Going on about 'theft' all the time, wishing it was a criminal offence when it isn't. It is a civil matter and if you and other SMEs want to protect their IP then pay for it.<br /><br />The old 'anonymous' criticisms are tiresome. You hate the internet? Lord knows how the internet could be so loathsome. Are you a luddite?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-2887419485909846282012-01-19T22:02:58.120+00:002012-01-19T22:02:58.120+00:00Re the comment above from Anonymous (posted at 6:4...Re the comment above from Anonymous (posted at 6:43:00):<br /><br />I wouldn’t normally reply to an Anonymous, as hiding behind anonymity is another aspect of the internet I despise. But whoever you are, you’ve given me such an easy target I might as well go for it.<br /><br />(The context, for those who don’t know: brave Anonymous is quoting from my post of today and from another one of mine some weeks ago, in which I didn’t say SMEs were not prepared to pay for IP protection; only that they have difficulty paying for it.)<br /><br />There is no connection between my two quotes except by 2+2=22 reasoning. Nor is there a contradiction. <br /><br />If I want something but consider the price too high, I have choices. I can grit my teeth and pay; I can do without; I can seek an alternative seller who offers better value for money; I can seek an alternative purchase that offers an acceptable compromise; I can enter into a mutually beneficial partnership with someone richer than me. <br /><br />In other words, I accept the ‘You want it, you pay for it’ rule of trade but have flexibility in applying it.<br /><br />I would not think it was my right to steal what I wanted, or to have ‘some other numpty’ (ugh!) pay for it for me. Maybe these are options you’re familiar with, but I don’t need them and nor do most other individuals and businesses with a moral compass.Graham Barkerhttp://www.abettermousetrap.co.uknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-46511985776760065602012-01-19T20:48:07.428+00:002012-01-19T20:48:07.428+00:00"Let me try to explain: when the late, great ..."Let me try to explain: when the late, great Scottish poet Robert Burns wrote "My love is like a red, red rose" he was making a partial comparison. <br /><br />Indeed he was, but the object chosen when making a partial comparison is important since it is central in conveying the meaning. That explains why Mr Burns did not attempt to write "My love is like a steaming pile of dung" explaining to her subsequently: "But my love, it was a partial comparison, I was pointing out how warm, soft and fragrant you are".<br /><br />Really Kat, get a grip.Slightly amusednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-48355758024746725932012-01-19T18:47:59.064+00:002012-01-19T18:47:59.064+00:00Well done RJ for accepting your misunderstanding.
...Well done RJ for accepting your misunderstanding.<br /><br />Now, why doesn't everyone else on the "string up the Kat" bandwagon, have a re-read and a think about what was actually said?<br /><br />With so many detractors, the Kat could make some money on a European "String up the Kat" theatre tour?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-91505228501590719102012-01-19T18:43:22.674+00:002012-01-19T18:43:22.674+00:00"From my perspective of working mainly with i..."From my perspective of working mainly with inventors and start-ups, an irritation is that government, IPO and many patent professionals don’t comprehend just how little cash SMEs have to play with, and what a sick joke the patent system has become."<br /><br />Compare with:<br /><br />"Umpteen thousand years of a business model that says ‘You want it, you pay for it’ are not going to be overturned by one generation of self-important internet leeches."<br /><br />Don't you see the contradiction here Graham? Small UK business 'want it' (IP protection) but are not prepared to 'pay for it'. They want some other numpty to that for them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-54288276844649622332012-01-19T18:40:00.281+00:002012-01-19T18:40:00.281+00:00It is NOT theft.
A world without the internet? Ho...It is NOT theft.<br /><br />A world without the internet? How about a world without medicines, clean water, babies nappies?<br /><br />If it wasn't for the garden shed brigade where would the country be now? Probably more technologically advanced and with less daft 'inventions' such as clockwork radios and ball-barrows. More investment in innovation and less whinging about the cost of paper and patents.<br /><br />I do hear on the grapevine, howver, that our top Boffins & Questers (those who work on identifying uselss solutions to the world's smallest problems in their spare time after their shift at B&Q) are near to perfecting a 'plastic cup and string' network to rival the internet. Apparently, with judicious and unexpected use of a reef knot it is possibly to connect 3 or more, preferably 4, plastic cups on a single thread. And to think the Koreans are wasting their resources on graphene!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-31595284740447285182012-01-19T18:13:39.137+00:002012-01-19T18:13:39.137+00:00The IPKat has explained that we need to take the c...The IPKat has explained that we need to take the comparison in context. It is true and I must admit it does make more sense when we think about it and thank you for that poem illustration.Excellent! <br />Millions of people have spoken in defence of a free and open internet. I hope there would be more constructive debates about this and would like to paraphrase Bernard Shaw<br /><br /> “Censorship ends in logical completeness when nobody is allowed to read any books except the books that nobody reads.”Rajeev Danielnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-36029002266534926782012-01-19T17:43:06.124+00:002012-01-19T17:43:06.124+00:00I’m with the Kat all the way on this one, and thin...I’m with the Kat all the way on this one, and think there’s maybe a generational factor being overlooked in all this debate. I’m old enough to remember perfectly well what life was like without the internet, and it was fine. If Wikipedia vanished forever I couldn’t care less. <br /><br />I believe that taking without permission or payment the work or property of someone else is theft, and theft is wrong. It’s even more wrong if a livelihood is affected by the loss. Therefore I support an imperfect law against digital piracy if the alternative is no law at all.<br /><br />I don’t remotely accept that ‘the freedom of the internet’ will be impaired if sellers - from corporates to sole traders - arm themselves with better protection against theft. Umpteen thousand years of a business model that says ‘You want it, you pay for it’ are not going to be overturned by one generation of self-important internet leeches. And for what it’s worth, while I have misgivings about UK/US extradition arrangements I think Richard O’Dwyer is a devious brat who deserves everything that’s coming to him. <br /><br />IP theft via file sharing, and the lack of will to do anything meaningful about it, is a moral disgrace. No excuses, no spurious ‘freedom’ defences please - let’s just get it stopped.Graham Barkerhttp://www.abettermousetrap.co.uknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-21895740024138537882012-01-19T17:16:11.688+00:002012-01-19T17:16:11.688+00:00Seems the bill has been binned now, so the looting...Seems the bill has been binned now, so the looting seems to have had the right effect. Who'd have thought tham my new free plasma TV and warm winter socks could have contributed so much to freedom of speech and democracy! Or have I misconstrued something?<br /><br />Thanks heaves that Google will survive. Where else would I have found so much advertising when searching for important information?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-21328745278253143752012-01-19T17:05:44.567+00:002012-01-19T17:05:44.567+00:00I’ve been trying to think of an apt analogy for Wi...I’ve been trying to think of an apt analogy for Wikipedia’s actions that doesn’t involve scare tactics invoking looters, and I here it is:<br /><br />A shopkeeper objects to a proposed new law that he fears may put him out of business. Could be anything –building a new bypass, or new laws on parallel importing. In protest, he closes his shop for a day, and puts up an explanation in the store window explaining why he thinks the new law is a bad idea, and why he thinks it will affect him. The idea is that anyone who visits and values his store will realize the potential effect of the new law, and be motivated to help stop it being enacted.<br /><br />Seems pretty reasonable, eh? And rather different to looting…Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-88233785067099569792012-01-19T17:00:31.338+00:002012-01-19T17:00:31.338+00:00@Rajeev Daniel
Let me try to explain: when the la...@Rajeev Daniel<br /><br />Let me try to explain: when the late, great Scottish poet Robert Burns wrote "My love is like a red, red rose", he was making a partial comparison, not a total one. He was suggesting that the lady who attracted his affection was possessed of a deep but transient beauty. He was not suggesting that she was covered with thorns and would benefit from being covered with manure from time to time.<br /><br />Likewise a boring law professor who sends his students to sleep in lectures might be compared to a cure for insomnia -- but it doesn't mean that he is one. <br /><br />When a comparison is made, the reader is directed to consider the point at which the comparison is relevant to its context. I was trying to make the point -- which some people understood and others missed -- that both action and inaction have the characteristic of not contributing to debate.<br /><br />That's all!Jeremyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01123244020588707776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-79491920309887906012012-01-19T16:48:57.593+00:002012-01-19T16:48:57.593+00:00That last response should of course have been @Ano...That last response should of course have been @Anon 3:06, rather than @Anon 3:55 -- sorry!JHnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-4848107322324658782012-01-19T16:43:21.547+00:002012-01-19T16:43:21.547+00:00Comments on this post seem to have polarised betwe...Comments on this post seem to have polarised between people who accept the intellectual point that Jeremy is making with his reference to street riots, and people who are outraged by the comparison and seem to think that IPKat has committed a thought crime.<br /><br />Count me in the former group.Markhttp://www.ipdraughts.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-85879380955427729332012-01-19T16:39:44.146+00:002012-01-19T16:39:44.146+00:00Sorry anon 3:55, but the choosing of rioters as a ...Sorry anon 3:55, but the choosing of rioters as a group to compare the wikipedia community to is <i>utterly</i> offensive.<br /><br />So too, frankly, is the suggestion that the little man should bow out because he/she has no place trying to upset decisions being fixed up between the "big barons".<br /><br />A better comparison, IMO, would be if your local vet school was threatened with closure (cf the <a href="http://www.pdn.cam.ac.uk/doc/history_vet.html" rel="nofollow">Riley report, 1988</a>), but the students organised a march through the town, including some people dressed up in cuddly animal costumes, handing out flyers explaining why the economic case for closure carved out in some opaque back-room deal did not in actual reality make sense -- albeit at the cost of some roads being closed in the town centre for the afternoon.<br /><br />You might think that "the nature of the awareness that was raised was however temporary and superficial: it did not contribute materially to the nature or the outcome of subsequent debate". But it caught the public imagination, the economic case <i>was</i> re-examined, and today the vet school is still open.<br /><br />That -- rather than riots on the streets -- is a far more honest comparison for the limited disruption caused by WP's outage yesterdayJHnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-44031779455369842082012-01-19T15:55:26.043+00:002012-01-19T15:55:26.043+00:00The blog post seems to make the point that one nee...The blog post seems to make the point that one needs to make a choice between debate and any form of "action" (crowd sourcing). However these two forms of trying to influence the outcome of the law making process are not mutually exclusive. There is power in arguments as there is in public opinion and economic pressure. In this case, both sides are using all means to influence the law making process. The post does not make it clear why any form of influencing power should be denied to the parties involved in a law making process.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-25955603892591302612012-01-19T15:19:19.366+00:002012-01-19T15:19:19.366+00:00Respected IPKat
Your opinion is very much respect...Respected IPKat<br /><br />Your opinion is very much respected but in this instance as the above comments have suggested, how could you possibly compare criminal and violent acts with Wikipedia blackout?<br />It is a leap that I dont understand.<br /><br />With regard to the Google point, it is true that If Google would not be affected by this bill, they would not be in the slightest bothered even if it is for the common good.<br /><br />I personally think copyright is a dinosaur in a digital age. It really has to evolve and keep up with the technology. <br /><br />Suppose the bill did get through and was enforced, it is only a matter of time before technology catches up and there is always a bypass; anyone who is dubious to this fact need only look at PirateBay and its resilience(1 billions visits/month and expected to grow). <br /><br />What needs to be done is to change the system which would be more flexible, open and collaborative in nature. I have to admit though that I have no clue on how to bring about this YET.rajeev danielnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-53012896490055011932012-01-19T15:06:52.352+00:002012-01-19T15:06:52.352+00:00I can't believe that so many readers of this w...I can't believe that so many readers of this weblog can miss the point of the comparison Jeremy makes between looting and blacking out. <br /><br />Incidentally, has anyone noticed why a strike is called a strike? It's a metaphor for hitting someone. Isn't it amazing how easily the force of a comparison can be forgotten?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-868080505956031372012-01-19T14:59:13.433+00:002012-01-19T14:59:13.433+00:00The kat insists that the Wikipedia blackout can be...The kat insists that the Wikipedia blackout can be compared with looting.<br /><br />To me, that's just insane.<br /><br />I would rather compare the Wikipedia blackout with a strike.<br /><br />Is the kat of the opinion that workers going on strike for just one day, to defend their interests or their point of view, not stealing anything (because as far as I know access to Wikipedia is FREE), are just as bad as looters ?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-55039500571237331402012-01-19T14:23:46.669+00:002012-01-19T14:23:46.669+00:00The only thing American politicians need explained...The only thing American politicians need explained is that they will face a massive public backlash if they vote with their campaign contributing friends from the copyright industry over the interests over the general public.<br /><br />Judging from the result of this action (much less support for this particular legislation with Senators), it has worked quite well. And this is exactly how the general public needs to act if it wants any chance against the lobbyists corrupting the political process in the United States.Karl-Friedrich Lenzhttp://k.lenz.name/LBnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-22447978672267317422012-01-19T14:12:25.362+00:002012-01-19T14:12:25.362+00:00Couple of comments:
- the analogy with the looting...Couple of comments:<br />- the analogy with the looting is wrong, and seriously diminishes the argumentative value of this post<br /><br />- legal process is flawed in all countries, but it is besides the point; talking about it, again, seriously weakens the value of this post.<br /><br />- the issue ignored, which is the at the core, is the fundamental out-of-date and unfit-for-purpose character of copyright. <br /><br />Locking away creativity behind the bars of thought crime for 70 years after the death of the author, in the name of promoting creativity, is ridiculous, inconsistent, and ineffective.<br /><br />The monopoly awarded to content-distributors (and it is the extension of the monopoly into the distribution part of the value chain that is a large part of the problem), based on a paradigmatic postulated inefficiency of the market (which, by the way, has never been empirically observed) is broken down by technology. <br /><br />That is, arguably, a good thing, not a bad thing. And labelling the monopoly "property" does not answer the issue. <br /><br />Unless I'm mistaken, revenue for artists has gone up since Napster, and the amount of music available on the Internet has exploded. That the music industry perishes - why should we care about inefficient, monopolistic middle men?<br /><br />Remind me why Hollywood needs protection, please. And if you quote any numbers, make sure to be able to back them up with real studies, performed by independent, credible institutions (good luck!).<br /><br />SOPA and PIPA allow governments and special interest groups to kill free speech, without due process. That is a much greater threat to our democracy than the lobbying itself. It is a direct threat to the Internet as we know it today, as well as a process-driven way to kill the concept of "fair use".<br /><br />And finally, it won't work.<br /><br />But, if as you say, the real issue is copyright and its inefficiency, why do you not write about that?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com