|
|
|
| Authored by: jbb on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 05:32 AM EDT |
I sometimes take people literally when they are being sarcastic. Perhaps that
is what happened here. The state sponsored corporatism that is reflected in the
current over-the-top US copyright and patent regimes is the exact opposite of the American Dream which
Wikipedia says is:
[...] a national ethos of the United States, a
set of ideals in which freedom includes the opportunity for prosperity and
success, and an upward social mobility achieved through hard work. In the
definition of the American Dream by James Truslow Adams in 1931, "life should be
better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each
according to ability or achievement" regardless of social class or
circumstances of birth.
IOW, our current patent and copyright
regimes are working in the direction of concentrating wealth into the hands of
fewer and fewer people. This is not the American Dream. Not even close.
We
seem to see things so differently that it feels like it is nearly impossible to
communicate. If you and the OP are being sarcastic then it is important to
indicate that somehow. If you are being serious then communication is nearly
impossible because the meanings you attach to several key concepts in this
discussion are the exact opposite of the meanings I use.
---
Our
job is to remind ourselves that there are more contexts
than the one we’re in now — the one that we think is reality.
-- Alan Kay [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- The source of the confusion - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 11:03 AM EDT
- It's a big country, and there is more than one dream ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 01:03 PM EDT
- It's a big country, and there is more than one dream ... - Authored by: Wol on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 03:59 PM EDT
- It's a big country, and there is more than one dream ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 06:19 PM EDT
- It's a big country, and there is more than one dream ... - Authored by: PJ on Sunday, May 12 2013 @ 04:02 AM EDT
- Oh, would some power the giftie gie us ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 12 2013 @ 05:04 PM EDT
- Oh really? - Authored by: jbb on Sunday, May 12 2013 @ 08:10 PM EDT
- Oh, would some power the giftie gie us ... - Authored by: PJ on Sunday, May 12 2013 @ 08:18 PM EDT
- OK - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 12 2013 @ 11:35 PM EDT
- OK - Authored by: PJ on Monday, May 13 2013 @ 01:01 AM EDT
- OK - Authored by: kuroshima on Monday, May 13 2013 @ 04:37 AM EDT
- OK - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 13 2013 @ 07:01 AM EDT
- nonverbal cues - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 13 2013 @ 07:19 AM EDT
- nonverbal cues - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 14 2013 @ 05:15 AM EDT
- OK - Authored by: Wol on Monday, May 13 2013 @ 10:51 AM EDT
- It's a big country, and there is more than one dream ... - Authored by: jbb on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 06:33 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Gringo_ on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 06:54 AM EDT |
Indeed, it has been a dream that, as our
manufacturing base
rusts and our exports of actual goods
dwindle and our imports increase, that it
would be possible
to export "intellectual property" instead and make
everybody
keep paying for it. Why else would we have constant attempts
to get
everybody else to align their patent systems with
ours and to sign treaties
which would make all the other
countries commit themselves to respect our
"intellectual
property" just as if it were their own? It isn't just
Hollywood
behind TPP and all those other treaties. Patents
are involved,
too.
Just what I have observed, living outside of the USA
and
seeing how my country is constantly being pressured by the
USA to enact IP
legislation in line with this dream of
theirs. At this very moment my
government leaders are down
there in Peru as commanded, at that super secret TPP
negotiating Round. The purpose of the secrecy
is exactly
so the participants can tighten up IP trade agreements
without
inconvenient protest at each and every meeting.
Classic
policy laundering.
"One common method for policy
laundering
is the use of international treaties
which are formulated in
secrecy. Afterwards it is not possible to find out who
opted
for which part of the treaty. Each person can claim that it
was not them
who demanded a certain paragraph but that they
had to agree to the overall
"compromise"".
A few years ago, a law was passed against the
export of encryption software and it was attempted to
suppress the free
dissemination of cryptographic research.
We all remember how well that turned
out. The effect was not
to deprive others of progress in cryptography at all.
No,
the result was to encourage the movement of research and the
production of
related software offshore. Brilliant move.
It seems in
response to US IP dominance ambitions China
has caught on to the game and have
started patenting
everything like mad, their own way, which favours them. With
a quarter of the world's population, they firmly hold the
keys to a market
there that dwarfs the USA. Beyond that, how
many US patents to they hold
now? [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
