Re: [ARSCLIST] land--was: Letter on British Copyright Term Extension

[Mwcpc6@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 5/17/2006 12:08:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
lyaa071@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
Indeed the justification for perpetual ownership of anything is an odd
notion. "No persons have more right to land than other
persons, but concentrations of power use force to maintain the illusion of
ownership of land."

http://www.n55.dk/MANUALS/DISCUSSIONS/N55_TEXTS/AB_LAND.html

I believe the same can be said for copyright, unfortunately, or so it
seems to me...the copyrights are flawed even from a fundamentally capitalistic
perspective.

Adding to my frustration is the notion that some believe there should be
perpetual ownership of intellectual property, which implies the "right"
to forever withhold that information, "property," from the public.

Karl
*****************

Those who appreciated their college history courses (unlike those in our 
government who are proud of how low their grades were) know that neither absolute 
perpetual ownership by divine right nor ownership by nobody in a public 
commons works as a design for a stable society.

There is a continuum between these extremes and an "operating point," in 
engineering terms, must be chosen at which to set up the rules. It needs to be 
adjusted from time to time to account for changing circumstances. This requires 
rational, disinterested judgment based on experience, something that seems to 
be very hard to come by nowadays.

Mike Csontos