[Discuss] Request for Comments: Digital DIY: Legal Challenges & Solutions Practised Report

Cláudio Sampaio patola at gmail.com
Sat Sep 24 15:03:04 UTC 2016

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 2:15 PM, Emilio Velis <contacto at emiliovelis.com>

> I might want to chip in on the discussion, since there is a lot of acid
> thrown into copyright alongside a lot of misconceptions.
> Now, having said this, there are different theories of copyright.
> Copyright is philosophically based on the notion of private property, which
> is a concept existing in all countries as far as I know, and is developed
> based on different theories, so the fact of the matter here is that you
> can't just come and say that 1. Copyright is an exclusive term for common
> law, or that 2. Copyright is slavery without admitting that all forms of
> private property are also akin to slavery to some degree.

​Just as copyleft is based on copyright, being "copyright turned on its
head" to mean that it's actually the opposite, intellectual "property" is
the very opposite of real, private property.​

​You own your media and you should be allowed to do whatever you wish with
it in your private space, or in agreement with others. But you can't,
because the overreach of intellectual "property" tries to confiscate the
power you have over your own stuff. More details here:

​Intellectual property also enforces artificial scarcity of non-scarce
goods. This is terrible. You create value but cannot fully exploit it,
because to conform to closed-minded lack of creativity on how to monetize
it, you resort to limit the number of copies that might be made, or limit
its scope. As an useful example: I have been looking for ways to implement
real curves on open-source 3D software - from slic3r to cura to blender -​
and found what seems to be the perfect work for it, a work of genius, a
mathematical achievement: T-splines.
http://www.tsplines.com/products/what-are-t-splines.html However, their
creators limited the value of this amazing piece of software to two quite
limited proprietary products, no doubt under secret private arrangements,
and progress on this front is unequivocally halted by decades. Sort of what
happened with the FDM and SLA patents, which halted the 3D printing
technologies for two decades -- we should already have star trek
replicators by now, if it weren't for patent law.

​There are many ways to monetize without intellectual "property" too:

​Do not forget that intellectual "property", due to simply existing,
requires an enormous amount of law support, institutions, structures, NGOs
and otherwise non-productive stuff - which is sort of "the broken window"
in economics, it's wasted money and resources.​

Cláudio "Patola" Sampaio
MakerLinux Labs - Campinas, SP
Gmail <patola at gmail.com> - Mail EAD <patola at techtraining.eng.br> -
MakerLinux <patola at makerlinux.com.br> - YOUTUBE
Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/patolinux> - Facebook da MakerLinux
<https://www.facebook.com/makerlinux> - Lattes
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.oshwa.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20160924/8cabb32d/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list