[Upd-discuss] a longer term strategy for promoting the publicdomain?

[bill murphy]

----- Original Message -----
From: "at" <at@ankitoner.com>
Cc: <upd-discuss@lists.essential.org>
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 6:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Upd-discuss] a longer term strategy for promoting the
publicdomain?


> For me it is a single issue. You can call me radical if you want. I have
> the "N(C)!" sign tatooed on my arm, and I wouldn't like to have to tatoo
> "N(P)!" and "N(TM)!" as well...
>
> On the other hand, I wouldn't be so sure that calling it "IP" biases on in
>
> talking about the issue. When I lecture about it, I always oppose IP to IF
>
> (Intellectual Freedom) and the bias works the other way round. But, of
> course, this might not work with conservative audiences.
>
> Anki Toner (from Barcelona, Spain, new to the list)
>
> En/Na Richard Stallman ha escrit:
>
> >     Do you think that that talking about 'IP' inevitably biases one in
> >     talking about the issue.
> >
> > Talking about 'IP' naturally leads people to think that this is one
> > single unified issue.  For instance, you said "about the issue", which
> > indicates you are treating it as one unified issue, something it
> > makes sense to choose as a topic.
> >
> >      If so in what terms would you prefer the debate to be conducted?
> >
> > We should discuss copyrights separately, discuss patents separately,
> > discuss trademarks separately, and not be led into treating them as a
> > single issue.

In my mind, it will take the support of a wide swath of the population
to make any meaningful change in the copyright, patent and trademark laws.
Many of the people that I deal with daily do not understand these issues and
suffer the apathy of ignorance.
If we lump all these issues together as "IP", it will make the issues more
confusing
and difficult to follow.
I am new to the list(I have lurked a while), so if I have violated any
convention, let me know.