[Upd-discuss] !@!Public Domain & Eminent Domain

[sandor]

Well said,

    You lay-out many solid points, and I very much agree it is a trap to 
think in terms of what has evolved to suite the exact social environment 
we currently have.. People are quite ingenious and will find a way to 
further any system they are given..

Cheers!
-sándor


P.S.
Having thought about it a bit - I would question whether the two 
functions you present are likely under a non-capitalist regime.. If 
capitalism requires intellectual control to make use of conceptual items 
- then certainly the capitalist system has a predilection for imposing 
control where none is otherwise needed..

Control is not limited to capitalism, but neither can it be removed from 
it.. This particular system is intrinsically hostile to the public 
domain.. It seems sensible that any system with the requisite of 
ownership will be the same.. I am not sure of any functional modern 
social systems that do not have this component, but I am quite certain 
someone more clever than myself has devised one :)


Jean-Baptiste Soufron wrote:

> I really think you're on a wrong debate because the use of  
> Intellectual Control has nothing to do with capitalism or other means  
> to organize the economical life of citizens.
>
> First, as Michael explained it quite often, Intellectual Control is a  
> tool to achieve policital means. Second, as Lawrence Lessig and  
> others highlighted it, Intellectual Control can also be given by  
> political agents to creative agents as an economical incentive for  
> Intellectual creation.
>
> But these 2 functions can very well be put in motion, whether the  
> economical environment is capitalist or not.
>
> Thus, we must not restrein ourselves to the rethorics of our enemies.  
> We must not talk about the economical reality of Intellectual  
> Property. But we must rather remember that the economical effect of  
> Intellectual Control is only a matter of politics.
>
> The economical role of Intellectual Property could very well be  
> achieved through other means. It only exists because politic agents  
> one day decided to delegate their censorship power to the people they  
> identified as authors, thus creating an economy of scarcity that may  
> well have been a good incentive for creation at a time... but which  
> is not justified as of today.
>
> That's why, I don't think we should lose ourselves in economical  
> debates about Intellectual Property : Intellectual Control is a  
> political theft of the freedom of consciousness that has only been  
> artificially delegated to "authors".
>
> Le 26 juil. 05 à 11:28, Rob Myers a écrit :
>
>> On 25 Jul 2005, at 18:48, sandor wrote:
>>
>>
>>>    All things public-domain are incompatible with capitalism.
>>>
>>
>> But surely not in the sense that capitalism cannot make use of  them. 
>> That is, capitalism can make use of the public domain quite  easily, 
>> and then deny the results of that usage to the public  domain. In 
>> this way, the public domain is more compatible with  capitalism than 
>> private property is, as private property must be  paid for, reducing 
>> profit.
>>
>> - Rob.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Upd-discuss mailing list
>> Upd-discuss@lists.essential.org
>> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/upd-discuss
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Upd-discuss mailing list
> Upd-discuss@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/upd-discuss
>
>
>