Thanks Dan,

Lou

On 1/28/2013 11:25 PM, Dan Krimm wrote:
> The deep history of copyright from Europe begins in an extension of feudal
> power to the new post-Gutenberg publishing industry (publishing monopoly in
> return for monarchal censorship power).  But in England in the 1600 there
> was a rebellion against the maximalist stance (monopoly of the Stationers
> Company -- John Locke was part of the revolt) and it was reframed in the
> Statute of Anne to derive from the authors (not the editors/publishers --
> sort of a "grand compromise").  The US version derives from the Anglo
> version.  There was also a French version that focused even more on
> authors' moral rights, but that can be overdone IMHO (more prone to
> maximalist tendencies).  Anglo-American tradition is more utilitarian, up
> until the last couple decades.
>
> In some sense we have returned to the more feudal beginnings, before the
> revolt of the Enlightenment.  Back in 2005 Robin introduced me to a great
> book describing current status: 'Information Feudalism' by Peter Drahos
> with John Braithwaite.  Great read for understanding what we're up against,
> still.
>
> Dan
>
>
> --
> Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the author alone and do
> not necessarily reflect any position of the author's employer.
>
>
>
> At 9:43 AM -0500 1/28/13, Carl Smith wrote:
>> My thoughts on copy rights.
>>
>> It is my belief that copy rights and patents were originally created to
>> promote the person who personally was the creator of such to financially
>> promote further creation.  We have gone far beyond that goal today.  The
>> actual creator is often not the recipient of that benefit.  Further it was
>> for commercial distribution and never for the monopoly of knowledge.  How
>> can this be fixed?
>>
>> Lou
>>
>> On 1/28/2013 3:01 AM, Andrei Barburas wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> Am I the only one who has the impression that sometimes the Governments
>>> give ideas to the potential hackers?
>>>
>>> If you notice, usually those claims and allegations regarding the "cyber
>>> world", come from individuals/government representatives that have no
>>> "IT" background. Napolitano has a law background, which makes me believe
>>> that this might be another case for copyright holders rather than a
>>> safety and anti terrorism case.
>>>
>>> I hope I am wrong though...
>>>
>>> Yours,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Andrei Barburas
>>>
>>> Community Relations Services Officer
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD)
>>>
>>> P.O. Box 11586, 2502 AN The Hague, The Netherlands
>>>
>>> NPOC, ICANN member
>>>
>>>
>>> Mobile: +31 62 928 2879
>>>
>>> Phone: +31 70 311 7311
>>> Fax: +31 70 311 7322
>>> Website: <http://www.iicd.org/>www.iicd.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> People   ICT   Development
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Carl Smith
>>> <<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Homeland Security's Napolitano invokes 9/11 to push for CISPA 2.0
>>>
>>> Link
>>> <https://rt.com/usa/news/napolitano-us-cyber-attack-761/>https://rt.com/usa/news/napolitano-us-cyber-attack-761/
>>>
>>> Lou
>