IP, theft, markets, morals (was Re: Plan 9 license)

[kmself at ix.netcom.com]

On Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 05:30:14PM -0700, Ken Arromdee wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Sep 2000, Mark Wells wrote:
> > Here's a simple test to determine if something has been stolen: does the
> > original owner still have it?
> 
> Doesn't work.  "Because my work is copied and the coies are widely spread, I
> do not have the potential market that I did before.  That market has been
> stolen from me."

But not the work itself.

The proper legal term, BTW, is misappropriation, WRT unauthorized
publication of a copyrighted work:  The act or an instance of applying
another's property or money dishonestly to one's own use.  Theft is "the
felonious taking and removing of anothers personal property with the
intent of depriving the true owner of it".  

Because of the nonrivalrous nature of use of information, theft is both
an improper technical term and (for reasons put forth by RMS) not
morally appropriate.  It's a misused pejorative.

There's a whole 'nother can of worms opened when you consider your
"market" and just how it's provided you in the first place.

-- 
Karsten M. Self <kmself at ix.netcom.com>     http://www.netcom.com/~kmself
 Evangelist, Opensales, Inc.                    http://www.opensales.org
  What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?   Debian GNU/Linux rocks!
   http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/    K5: http://www.kuro5hin.org
GPG fingerprint: F932 8B25 5FDD 2528 D595 DC61 3847 889F 55F2 B9B0
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20000903/d4c408eb/attachment.sig>