First of all, let' say that I don't believe 'property' to be a fundamental right, but rather a notion on which society has agreed by contract.
The position held by Agathon and Whaleboy, however, seems dubious to me in that they stipulate that the notion of property should be abolished for intellectual work, because of the nature of the result of the work- i.e., abstract property.
However, it seems to me that 'property' has not been agreed upon because of its nature per se, but rather as a recognition of the work required to achieve it. If you deny intellectual property, you are denying physical property, too.
Let's take this example: if everyone could buy a pill-machine for 60$, along with the basic chemistries needed for a few bucks, and download pill-codes on Kazaa, do you think we should be justified of depriving the pharmaceutical companies of their patents?
This leads us to my point:
R&D=production costs (studio time, a movie special effects, etc). Both can be circumvented because their results can be 'digital'- i.e, mp3 or 'pill code'.
Pill=Material support of the property (DVD, book, etc). As it would be in my example, both can be circumvented because the hardware to forge them is cheap.
However exaggerate is the majors' power, there are some costs we cannot deny. And I don't think intellectual work has less worth than physical work.
What I believe, though, is that as society, we can take steps to increase the availability of intellectual work and reduce the unjustified costs needed to acquire it. Nevertheless, it remains that intellectual work should be recognized, and its produce available for free only if the author agrees.
As a tool to undermine the RIAA, Kazaa is justified. To claim intellectual property does not exist is a fallacy.
----Agathon
You were wrong on the distribution issue. There will always be a need for a place to distribute mp3s WHEN they are released- if only for them to reach the sub-networks, such as Kazaa. Running a server with lots of bandwidth is expensive. These costs are not covered by your broadband connection.
The position held by Agathon and Whaleboy, however, seems dubious to me in that they stipulate that the notion of property should be abolished for intellectual work, because of the nature of the result of the work- i.e., abstract property.
However, it seems to me that 'property' has not been agreed upon because of its nature per se, but rather as a recognition of the work required to achieve it. If you deny intellectual property, you are denying physical property, too.
Let's take this example: if everyone could buy a pill-machine for 60$, along with the basic chemistries needed for a few bucks, and download pill-codes on Kazaa, do you think we should be justified of depriving the pharmaceutical companies of their patents?
This leads us to my point:
R&D=production costs (studio time, a movie special effects, etc). Both can be circumvented because their results can be 'digital'- i.e, mp3 or 'pill code'.
Pill=Material support of the property (DVD, book, etc). As it would be in my example, both can be circumvented because the hardware to forge them is cheap.
However exaggerate is the majors' power, there are some costs we cannot deny. And I don't think intellectual work has less worth than physical work.
What I believe, though, is that as society, we can take steps to increase the availability of intellectual work and reduce the unjustified costs needed to acquire it. Nevertheless, it remains that intellectual work should be recognized, and its produce available for free only if the author agrees.
As a tool to undermine the RIAA, Kazaa is justified. To claim intellectual property does not exist is a fallacy.
----Agathon
You were wrong on the distribution issue. There will always be a need for a place to distribute mp3s WHEN they are released- if only for them to reach the sub-networks, such as Kazaa. Running a server with lots of bandwidth is expensive. These costs are not covered by your broadband connection.
Comment