Stepping on the Toes of Giants

by on May 7, 2007 · 14 comments

My paper critiquing arguments contra copyright from the cumulative nature of knowledge is out.

  • http://www.digitalproductions.co.uk Crosbie Fitch

    I presume everyone knows that The Technology Liberation Front is intended as a honeypot to lure and uselessly expend the energy of those antagonistic to IP maximalism?

    Key intended beneficiaries in this respect are PFF .org and IP Central .info, sucessfully remaining devoid of constructive criticism since inception.

    However, the honey here don’t half taste good.

    Yum!

  • http://www.techliberation.com/ Tim Lee

    Crosbie, I think Solveig has produced an interesting and substantive paper, and while I don’t agree with all of it, I think she deserves better than ad hominem attacks. It’s not surprising that she’d be reluctant to engage critics here on TLF if they subject her to constant abuse.

  • http://www.digitalproductions.co.uk Crosbie Fitch

    I presume everyone knows that The Technology Liberation Front is intended as a honeypot to lure and uselessly expend the energy of those antagonistic to IP maximalism?

    Key intended beneficiaries in this respect are PFF .org and IP Central .info, sucessfully remaining devoid of constructive criticism since inception.

    However, the honey here don’t half taste good.

    Yum!

  • http://www.techliberation.com/ Tim Lee

    Crosbie, I think Solveig has produced an interesting and substantive paper, and while I don’t agree with all of it, I think she deserves better than ad hominem attacks. It’s not surprising that she’d be reluctant to engage critics here on TLF if they subject her to constant abuse.

  • http://www.digitalproductions.co.uk Crosbie Fitch

    If I wanted to citicise Solveig’s paper I would have done so elsewhere. I certainly don’t need to resort to ad hominems.

    Solveig made an announcement.

    I’ve taken this interstitial opportunity to make a tongue-in-cheek hypothesis concerning the apparent relationship between TLF, PFF, and IP Central, that’s all.

  • http://www.digitalproductions.co.uk Crosbie Fitch

    If I wanted to citicise Solveig’s paper I would have done so elsewhere. I certainly don’t need to resort to ad hominems.

    Solveig made an announcement.

    I’ve taken this interstitial opportunity to make a tongue-in-cheek hypothesis concerning the apparent relationship between TLF, PFF, and IP Central, that’s all.

  • http://enigmafoundry.wordpress.com/ enigma_foundry

    Here’s some criticism:

    The paper suffers from a terminal case of generalitis. It is just a summary of some pros and cons of the different positions re: the statement Information wants to be free. Does not really add much, nor does it contain much in the way of reference. Is it an outline?

    A little specificity would be helpful. For example, song writers vs Scientists vs. Architects.

    Each would have different motivations for wanting to copyright (or patent) their work.

    Historically, Science and Architecture have both progressed with very little effective direct legal control over the ‘IP’ that is incidental to their work product which is very often really a service.

    In particular, there is a very enlightening discussion related to control of one’s work product by an Architect in part two of the very good series:

    http://www.pbs.org/designe2/

    Solveig, my experience, working in a creative industry, is that a very substantial motivation for working in these fields is esteem of your peers, and other copying your ideas is usually a good thing, unless of course those who do the copying don’t give credit. Hence a very strong ethos against using someones ideas without giving credit.

    Yes, Architects do have to pay our mortgages, but after all I did become an Architect for a reason.

    So, my own personal experience is very different than Solveig’s conclusion, and I don’t understand what the work is: an outline or an argument.

  • http://enigmafoundry.wordpress.com/ enigma_foundry

    It’s not surprising that she’d be reluctant to engage critics here on TLF if they subject her to constant abuse.

    Hmmm Tim we are being a bit thin skinned, after all someone here decided to use some pretty vile languagew against me a few posts back. No one from TLF seemed to object. A bit of adouble standard, I would say.

    Didn’t stop me posting then, won’t stop me now. It is part of the reason I use the pseudonym, though.

  • http://www.movingtofreedom.org/ Scott Carpenter

    Honeypot. Yes. When I first discovered this site through links from various places to Tim’s posts, I thought it was quite tasty. I gradually learned of this strange web between TLF and PFF/IPCentral and it has spoiled the flavor a bit.

    I still enjoy many posts by Tim, and am always happy to see contributions from Crosbie, Enigma, and others. In this case, thank you for your interstitial observation, Crosbie.

  • http://enigmafoundry.wordpress.com/ enigma_foundry

    Here’s some criticism:

    The paper suffers from a terminal case of generalitis. It is just a summary of some pros and cons of the different positions re: the statement Information wants to be free. Does not really add much, nor does it contain much in the way of reference. Is it an outline?

    A little specificity would be helpful. For example, song writers vs Scientists vs. Architects.

    Each would have different motivations for wanting to copyright (or patent) their work.

    Historically, Science and Architecture have both progressed with very little effective direct legal control over the ‘IP’ that is incidental to their work product which is very often really a service.

    In particular, there is a very enlightening discussion related to control of one’s work product by an Architect in part two of the very good series:

    http://www.pbs.org/designe2/

    Solveig, my experience, working in a creative industry, is that a very substantial motivation for working in these fields is esteem of your peers, and other copying your ideas is usually a good thing, unless of course those who do the copying don’t give credit. Hence a very strong ethos against using someones ideas without giving credit.

    Yes, Architects do have to pay our mortgages, but after all I did become an Architect for a reason.

    So, my own personal experience is very different than Solveig’s conclusion, and I don’t understand what the work is: an outline or an argument.

  • http://enigmafoundry.wordpress.com/ enigma_foundry

    It’s not surprising that she’d be reluctant to engage critics here on TLF if they subject her to constant abuse.

    Hmmm Tim we are being a bit thin skinned, after all someone here decided to use some pretty vile languagew against me a few posts back. No one from TLF seemed to object. A bit of adouble standard, I would say.

    Didn’t stop me posting then, won’t stop me now. It is part of the reason I use the pseudonym, though.

  • http://www.movingtofreedom.org/ Scott Carpenter

    Honeypot. Yes. When I first discovered this site through links from various places to Tim’s posts, I thought it was quite tasty. I gradually learned of this strange web between TLF and PFF/IPCentral and it has spoiled the flavor a bit.

    I still enjoy many posts by Tim, and am always happy to see contributions from Crosbie, Enigma, and others. In this case, thank you for your interstitial observation, Crosbie.

  • http://www.digitalproductions.co.uk Crosbie Fitch

    My pleasure Scott.

    They may think we’re morons bashing our heads against their brick wall, but actually we’re sharpening our knives, improving our acuity… and their edifice will crumble soon anyway.

    I just thought I’d check that there weren’t actually any libertarians around here who’d mistaken TLF as the voice and bastion of enlightened revolutionaries.

    No comrades, this is a whetstone for the mind.

  • http://www.digitalproductions.co.uk Crosbie Fitch

    My pleasure Scott.

    They may think we’re morons bashing our heads against their brick wall, but actually we’re sharpening our knives, improving our acuity… and their edifice will crumble soon anyway.

    I just thought I’d check that there weren’t actually any libertarians around here who’d mistaken TLF as the voice and bastion of enlightened revolutionaries.

    No comrades, this is a whetstone for the mind.

Previous post:

Next post: