Re: Some interesting economic facts

[Matt Deatrick <mattd@shocking.com>]

	Brett is right, that is the purpose. Let me give you an example of
where ownership of information has gone awry.
	LSAT, the sattelite system put up by the governement for
educational research, had its information sold to the highest bidder in
1988(i think that's the year). This was EOSTAT( GM and Hughes). The price
to universities and private citizens of this publically created, run, and
funded program went from cost(a few hundred per annual subscription) to
$5000 dollars! This is NO JOKE! Simply by owning the rights to the
information created by this program its usefulness has been destroyed by
the profit motive. I think there are instances, and I think the O/S is one
of them, where private companies are doing it wrong. Browsers shouldn't be
free, O/s's should be!
	Matt


On Wed, 22 Apr 1998, Brett Glass wrote:

> At 02:10 AM 4/22/98 -0400, Mark Hinds wrote:
>  
> >The locking up of knowledge is simply an artificial creation. Take it
> >away
> >and just like the Y2K problem, life will go on. The only reason to
> >continue
> >these intellectual property laws is to promote the wealth concentrating
> >efforts
> >of those who can afford to own intellectual property. The vast majority
> >of
> >people derive no benefit. As to motivation, money does not promote the
> >best,
> >only the greediest. If there is a need then a means to satisfy this need
> >will develop.
> 
> Sorry, but the above contains loaded words and inflammatory rhetoric
> and is utterly unsubstantiated by fact. In fact, it is contradicted by what
> you say below (though I have no idea if your tale is accurate or not).
> 
> >BTW, my understanding is that the concept of patent originated in
> >England
> >(a Monty Python sketch? :-). A certain canon maker had developed a
> >formula
> >for steel(?) which allowed canons to be made significantly lighter so
> >your
> >ships could carry more and artillery could go faster. The fellow who
> >knew
> >the formula died without leaving it behind and so it was back to
> >the heavier canons. As a result the concept of patent was created as a
> >means
> >of getting critically useful information divulged, not as a nice thing
> >to do for clever people. The exclusive rights protection was the the 
> >necessary inducement.
> >
> >So I've heard anyway. Correct me if I'm mistaken.
> 
> It is true that patents and copyrights provide exclusivity for a limited time
> both as an incentive to create and as a way of eventually bringing the
> invention or artistic work into the public domain.
> 
> --Brett Glass
> 
>