[Discuss] the significance of oshw

[Matt Maier]

I had the impression that copyright law was one of the more globally
consistent sets of rights, at least compared to something like patent law.
Pretty much all countries are parties to a couple multilateral copyright
law treaties
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_international_copyright_treaties

Also, "copyright" isn't an American invention. The law started after the
invention of the printing press and I'm sure the concept was around before
that.

I do agree that details are important and those tend to vary from one
country to another. Also that the existence of a law means nothing without
enforcement, which can also vary from country to country.

I'm not going to pretend to be an expert, but it seems like "copyleft" is
exactly the same as copyright. The creator is granted rights when they
create something, which they can keep for themselves or delegate to
non-creators. Copyleft mearly means that the creator is using the existing
copyright law to delegate/enforce a certain set or rights. They only
changed the name because they had a different goal than traditional
copyright users. Since copyleft just uses normal copyright in an abnornal
way, the basic idea should apply in any country that has copyright laws;
not just the US.
-Matt

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:47 AM, FREE SMALL WIND TURBINE PROJECT PEOPLE <
smallwindturbineproj.contactor at gmail.com> wrote:

>   Alicia might have tiped :
>
> *>[I'm really nervous I might sound like a jerk with this next statement,
> but I'm going to say it anyway] *
> > As an American, I think I've been around capitalistic thinking for so
> long, it's hard for me to think
> > outside of the standard reasons you listed.
>
> Hi Alicia,
> When you'll discover that "copyright" is a pure US law creation and US law
> word definition that has not necessary equivalence in some other countries,
> then, you also discover that all copyleft licenses will not apply to those
> countries, except if the author get a compliant US copyright, or except if
> some local lawyers of those countries can make the bridge with their local
> law and US copyright using wording law style which obviously will be only
> applicable the one specific context behind a court in those country.
> And, when you got this picture, you come to very strange conclusion: US
> has a supremacy on all copyleft license, because copyright is a US law
> concept and definition. And then, to force local laws to accept this
> concept, some local laws are changed in order to match with US
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.oshwa.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20131106/1a154b73/attachment.html>