05-05-2003, 10:20 PM
The truth is Pete both perspectives are legitmate.(Im speaking to the ethics of intelecual property ownership - not the issue of obeying a law be it right or wrong.)
1 There is a rational position that - only that which can be held/touched can be owned. That which is known is free.(this could be broken down farther in that it might be unethical to profit from someone elses idea, but still be ethical to share it freely).
2 There is a rational position that - the dicoverer/creater of knowledge, owns it(music in its digital form is knowledge, as is software).
This is not something that can be proved one way or another. Its matter of values.
1 There is a rational position that - only that which can be held/touched can be owned. That which is known is free.(this could be broken down farther in that it might be unethical to profit from someone elses idea, but still be ethical to share it freely).
2 There is a rational position that - the dicoverer/creater of knowledge, owns it(music in its digital form is knowledge, as is software).
This is not something that can be proved one way or another. Its matter of values.