[conspire] Book Burning continues thanks to the Feds

Ruben Safir ruben at mrbrklyn.com
Wed Mar 23 04:48:36 PDT 2011

On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 01:44:17AM -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Ruben Safir (ruben at mrbrklyn.com):
> > I disagree with that.  First, its not property, and the comparision is
> > inapropriate. 
> Disagree all you want.  The entire worldwide court system, plus 
> United States Constitution Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 render your
> view irrelevant.  And anyway, it doesn't even _matter_ whether you 
> want to raise a tizzy over the word 'property', so spare us the 
> shibbloeth[1]:  The point is that copyrights exist and vouchsafe
> reserved rights to owners, that Authors Guild and co-plaintiff represent
> only the tiniest sliver of all rights owners, and that neither Google,
> Inc. nor Judge Chin has any business stripping rights from those
> non-litigating owners without a top-to-bottom rewrite of the nation's
> copyright laws by Congress and a renegotiation of international
> copyright law by the nations of the world.

Copyright under US law and under English Common Law is not property and
it is only a matter of time that the Bern Convention is found

It is a limited monopoly for the expressed purpose of assuring only a
single purpose, which is not to create "property" but to asure the
furthernce of published works and invention.

Whether you enjoy hearing those facts or not doesn't change it as facts
going as far back to the time of the St Anne grants.


> Don't try to ignore those _vital_ surrounding facts by merely posting 
> the idiotic dodge of 'Well, I don't agree about it being property.'
> It doesn't _gently caressing matter_ whether you agree about it being 
> property.  That's entirely irrelevant to the point under scrutiny.
> As an aside, however, I _do_ get really tired of software ideologues
> trying to claim that copyrights, or patents, or trade secrets, or
> trademarks are 'not property', especially when I have extensively
> studied business law and they haven't (and basically know only what they
> _want_ to be true).  Give it a rest; save both of us time trying.
> At least you don't have a Scandinavian surname, or you'd be _really_
> getting the sharp edge if my tongue, chaver Ruben.  ;->  (But hey, I
> believe I've served you lingonberries at my house, so you're hereby
> declared honorary Norwegian.  Welcome!)
> > Secondly, that's not what Google did.  They scanned books
> > largely out of print adn unlocked that wealth of information.  It should
> > be allowed wether the authors wish it or not.
> Sorry, this _doesn't even contradict_ what I said.  
> > Further, the settlement would not have prevented another company from
> > likewise scanning books, especailly out of print works and doing the
> > same.
> Untrue unless you mean 'and thereby commit copyright violation and risk
> owing huge damages'.  
> The right that would have been granted by the proposed (and now
> rejected) settlement to Google, Inc. made no provision whatsoever for
> any similar rights to any other party.  So, the only way 'another
> company' could have likewise 'scann[ed] books' and published them on the
> Internet without copyright holder permission would be for that second
> company to run the same infringement lawsuit gauntlet all over again,
> and find a second compliant judge.
> > Law that thinks about this as "property" needs to be reversed and google
> > should start to lobby for a change in the law.
> Maybe yes, maybe no, but completely irrelevant to present discussion.
> Finally, I notice you have so far disregarded my other serious points,
> e.g., the summary jettisoning in the now-rejected settlement of
> antitrust concerns, censorship protection, and privacy.  Sorry to see
> that. 
> [1] History's first recorded instance of two-factor authentication:
> Sefer Shoftim 12:5-6.  Fortunately, I have an excellent Gileadic accent.
> -- 
> Rick Moen                        "A shprakh iz a dialekt mit an armey un flot."
> rick at linuxmafia.com                                -- Max Weinreich, linguist
> McQ!  (4x80)
> _______________________________________________
> conspire mailing list
> conspire at linuxmafia.com
> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/conspire

http://www.mrbrklyn.com - Interesting Stuff
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software

So many immigrant groups have swept through our town that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological proportions in the mind of the world  - RI Safir 1998

http://fairuse.nylxs.com  DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002

"Yeah - I write Free Software...so SUE ME"

"The tremendous problem we face is that we are becoming sharecroppers to our own cultural heritage -- we need the ability to participate in our own society."

"> I'm an engineer. I choose the best tool for the job, politics be damned.<
You must be a stupid engineer then, because politcs and technology have been attached at the hip since the 1st dynasty in Ancient Egypt.  I guess you missed that one."

© Copyright for the Digital Millennium

More information about the conspire mailing list