[lit-ideas] Re: What is information? (third try)
- From: "Mike Geary" <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 17:47:10 -0500
RP:
I give up. I just give up. It's the rain. It's the coming world crisis.
It's
that new stuff I'm taking for my sinuses. It's the Pope.
Oh what a perverse pleasure I get from those lines.
Forget the computer, that's a red herring. It's the programming that's open
to question. PJ writes: "Copyright law covers only the author's
'expression,' but not the underlying ideas. As long as one does not copy
the author's expression there is no copyright infringement." Does that mean
that a program idea pitched to a TV network isn't covered under copyright
laws? Or that a movie idea treatment presented to a studio isn't protected?
It's my understanding that they are -- but hard to prove. Else why would
any writer in his right mind pitch ideas? Am I mistaken in my understanding
that some big lawsuits of recent time (Art Buchwald's for instance) were
found in favor of the artist on the basis of "story ideas"? If I am right,
what's the difference between expression and ideas here?
I'm lost as to why you think defining "information" is crucial to your
argument. You're a strange lot, you lawyers, but isn't it obvious that in
this instance "information" is just a corporate glorification of "data" just
as "human resources" is an attempt to glorify the work of those people who
must deal with common workers? I mean really, it's all bullshit, isn't it?
Or am I really missing some species-defining difference here?
Isn't your real question, as you've asked it before in other guises: Is
computer programming a sufficiently creative activity that it should be
rewarded by securing the financial proceeds resulting from its use to the
programmers -- or to those who bought out their rights when they were so
desperate for a job they'd have signed anything? Or is it similar to lacing
one's shoes?
There are those who say that no intellectual property should be
patentable -- I'm not among them seeing as how I'm planning on one day
leaving my kids with millions from my yet unfinished Great Confederate
Novel -- Vote No on the Death Tax!! -- but I'm assuming you're not wanting
to overthrow the U. S. Government -- not over this anyway. So, my question
to you is, do laws ever get enacted because they make sense logically? Or
only because moneyed / electorial interests are at stake?
My advise is that you stop all this intellectualizing and go scare the shit
out of politicians so they'll vote your way, Peter. A man of your age and
experience and education -- I shouldn't have to tell you this.
Mike Geary
Memphis
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
