TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: A Question of Ethics From:Scott Wahl <wahl_scott -at- yahoo -dot- ca> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:37:06 -0700 (PDT)
This has turned into an absurd discussion.
Kevin, you apprently don't think there should be any
legal safeguards to protect stuff like intellectual
property, patents, and so on? Copyright law is not an
"artifical legal construct" - or at least it's not any
more artificial than any other legal construct out
there.
Knowledge is a very valuable asset, often much more so
than tangible goods. If you steal my knowledge (be it
a document or a piece of software) and then use it
without paying me, you're stealing.
Why is stealing my toaster a bad thing, when stealing
my design (for an amazing new toaster) not stealing?
People and companies invest millions of dollars in
R&D: that's investment in an asset (intellectual
property) that the law protects.
Why? Because we want to encourage and stimulate
innovation (whether it's for a new drug or a new kind
of Jello) and the only way to do that is protect
people's investment in innovation.
The fact that many of us break the law routinely (by
copying cassette tapes, for example) doesn't mean that
the legal framework ought to be torn down.
At any rate, unless someone on this list is a legal
expert, there's not much point in continuing to
discuss this. We ought to get back to something we
know about.
Scott
--
Kevin wrote:
<snip>
Wrong analogy. If you steal my toaster, I
no longer have the use of it. If you "steal"
a piece of software, then unless you took
the CD, the original owner still has the
use of the program. The SELLER can still
sell. What they have lost is an artificially
created and artificially enforced opportunity
to possibly sell to the person who has the
copy.
I see a difference. Perhaps some of you can't.
I'd bet that most of those who profess to see
no difference are telling the lie because they
think admitting that there's a difference might
weaken the case for a possibly lucrative artificial
legal construct.
</snip>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
*** Deva(tm) Tools for Dreamweaver and Deva(tm) Search ***
Build Contents, Indexes, and Search for Web Sites and Help Systems
Available now at http://www.devahelp.com or info -at- devahelp -dot- com
A landmark hotel, one of America's most beautiful cities, and
three and a half days of immersion in the state of the art:
IPCC 01, Oct. 24-27 in Santa Fe. http://ieeepcs.org/2001/
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
