Intellectual Property Discussion in the Classroom? 135
Nick M asks: "I'm a TA for a Computer Ethics course at Lehigh University. My professor is currently in China, and I'm charged with the task of teaching the chapter on Intellectual Property. I have read the book (Cyberethics, Spinello, 3rd Ed.), and can see that this could be the most boring 75 minutes of their lives. What topics, examples and questions do you think would stimulate a heated discussion on intellectual property rights which would display the complexities of both sides of the issue?"
the guy who invented intermittent windshield wiper (Score:5, Informative)
This [forbes.com] could be a good starting point (an article listing some pioneers in inventions, and some of their fates).
Also, this article [theautochannel.com] is a synopsis of Robert Kearns' battle with Ford over his IP/patent rights for the invention of the intermittent windshield wiper.
Re: (Score:2)
1. What are the goals of an information economy? What do we want to achieve?
2. Why does copyright exist in the first place? - the incentive model of IP, the programmers must eat argument. Does this incentive actually work?
3. To what extent does IP protection devalue the information it protec
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
- For instance: Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart indeed was dying poor, but not because of missing protection of his works: He just spent too much money. Michael Jackson is also broke, and he has the full protection of copyrights
- Copyright in the U.S. at first protected only works of U.S. origin. British works like
Re: (Score:2)
Are you sure that that's safe ? After all, if his student comes up with the position that copyright is bad, he might be accused of contrabutory infringement or some nonsense like that.
Intellectual honesty can be very dangerous in times of war, and copyright battles look more like war to me every day.
First thing to remember (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:First thing to remember (Score:4, Funny)
Dude, did you not read page 15, paragraph 5, sub-bullet A(1):
You shall not disclose the length of this Non-Disclosure Agreement to any third party.
You are SO gonna get sued!
Re: (Score:2)
complexities on both sides? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
nice policy, pity it spells the total death of the worlds economy, and probably kicks 90% of slashdot readers out of work.
Class dismissed.
Go on, mod me down because you want to find a way to justify taking other peoples hard work. Its the slashdot way.
Re: (Score:2)
I see. so you werent planning on any drugs being discovered in future, any big budget movies being made, or any major pieces of commercial software ever being made ever again?
Proof by Assertion [wikipedia.org] is a logical fallacy.
Go on, mod me down because you want to find a way to justify taking other peoples hard work. Its the slashdot way.
You deserve to be modded down because your post is worthless.
Re: (Score:2)
Bunions post has the same problem.
Cliffski's post actually has reasons and examples for preserving IP. NOT a worthless post.
Your logic is worthless. Good link though.
Re: (Score:2)
More like proof by elaboration.
There is no elaboration. There is no evidence. There isn't even an argument. Merely a list of conclusions which are assumed to be true because the poster states they are true. A textbook example of Proof By Assertion.
Cliffski's post actually has reasons and examples for preserving IP. NOT a worthless post.
I am searching this post [slashdot.org] in vain for even the slightest shred of evidence to support:
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'll break it down for you in baby bites.
If IP isn't respected, it won't be profittable for corporations to spend multi-millions discovering new drugs, or making big budget movies, or writing hugely complicated commercial software.
Now there are obvious counter-arguments that governments and philanthropists could fund the drug research. The counter-counter argument is that's u
Corporations discovering new drugs (Score:2)
If IP isn't respected, it won't be profittable for corporations to spend multi-millions discovering new drugs
I'd like to quote a bit of page 99 of Naomi Klein's No Logo if I may (hopefully I may, otherwise I guess I'll be sued next):
Re: (Score:2)
that's a long way from saying they're deliberately witholding an AIDS cure.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because you are apparently incapable of seeing the dots that were connected to arrive at those conclusions?
No, because those conclusions have been stated *without any supporting evidence*. Hence, they are an example of "Proof by assertion".
Some examples of things that might be considered "evidence":
* An examination of major medical discoveries pertaining to cures and treatments of disabling sicknesses and injuries over the last ~200 years or so, showing that for-profit private industry has been the onl
Re: (Score:2)
These are the assertions that are lacking evidence. Waving your hand and saying "because they will", is not evidence.
Specifically for blockbuster movies, I did mention Terminator 4. I'm not going to cite studies or surveys attempting to prove the National Endowment for the Arts wouldn't fund it if it were up to them
Re: (Score:2)
Specifically for blockbuster movies, I did mention Terminator 4. I'm not going to cite studies or surveys attempting to prove the National Endowment for the Arts wouldn't fund it if it were up to them, because there are no studies.
Right. Except you didn't explain a) why Terminator 4 couldn't have been made regardless, nor b) why not having Terminator 4 would be a bad thing, nor c) why the same movie simply couldn't have been made cheaper.
With respect to drug research and software development, I also ga
Re: (Score:2)
Because in an IP-protected world, Hollywood would make T4 is its own way. I don't want T4 made on the cheap. As for T4 not existing possibly being good, that's for you to argue. I'm in favor of Hollywood blockbusters because I like them as they are. I don't have to give those explanations, becaus
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have to give those explanations, because it's obvious that without IP the movie would either be made differently, or not at all. As for why it's obvious, well even the homeless know people are pirating movies, and in the history of the arts, there's never been funding for frivolous, hugely expensive entertainment productions for the masses. I'm giving you and others the benefit of intelligence.
You still haven't provided a shred of evidence to support your arguments that movies can only be made wit
Re: (Score:2)
Orion pictures went under around 1990. Remember MGM? Sony had some big losses in the mid 90s as well. These days Paramount has cut back their number of yearly releases because they can't afford more like the bigger studios. I'd say overall studios do not make excessive profits, and it takes good management an
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
drugs companies will not invest ten million dollars in a new drug if that drug is trivially copied the next day by a rival who spends zero on development. To do so, would be to effectivly just cripple you own competitiveness, and drive yourself out of business by increased relative costs. This is not rocket science.
the concept of IP is absolutely necesary because it is the ONLY viable way of ensuring that research and develo
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Drug companies have no incentive to create cures. Plain and simple. If they were to create drugs that eliminated disease, then they would be putting themselves out of business.
Yes, I do consider i
Re: (Score:2)
I can't even start to fathom what the mind that thinks this is like. Genentech came up with a goddamn cure for some kind of cancer a while back for fucks sake. Not to mention, oh, I don't know, all the other goddamn extinct diseases like smallpox, polio and lord knows what else.
Cures are hard. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I can't even start to fathom what the mind that thinks this is like.
That would be the mind of an ideal capitalist.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
hmmm, i didnt think it was neccesaru to spell out the obvious but apparently it is.
Waving your hand and calling it "obvious" does not make it fact.
drugs companies will not invest ten million dollars in a new drug if that drug is trivially copied the next day by a rival who spends zero on development. To do so, would be to effectivly just cripple you own competitiveness, and drive yourself out of business by increased relative costs. This is not rocket science.
Drugs are not successfully reverse-engineer
Re: (Score:2)
trademarks: not needed, if you try to pretend you're some other products, you're commiting fraud. If you aren't, then there's no problem
trade secrets: not needed, sh
Re: (Score:2)
when I see a 'solution' to a problem that involves dismantling large chunks of what we have now, I view it with the same suspicion that I do when someone tells me that they have to rewrite an entire system from scratch. The idea is always seductively simple, but when put inot action devolves into the same morass of complexity that we have now. Because it's not like anyone deliberately starts out with the idea
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
sure, but we never had a medium in which ip can be so effectively distributed before.
> I have never seen any proof to show that ip causes increased scientific discovery. And I've seen quite a bit of anecdotal evidence and logic that says the exact opposite.
I think you're simply finding what you're looking for.
Re: (Score:2)
Only applies to copyright, not the rest of them. And even then its a weak point- for the vast majority of human existance, artists did not make a living off of per copy fees. Quite frankly, the internet shows just why copyrights are ridiculous, now that they're broken we have an even better reason to just ditch them.
>I think you're simply finding what you're looking for.
As are you. SHow me proof. Show me proof t
Re: (Score:2)
I guess I've been using 'IP' as a sort of umbrella term for copyright, trademarks, etc, which is probably leading to some confusion. I'm gonna have to sort out just exactly what these terms mean.
Re: (Score:2)
Just because you're ignoring the complexities doesn't mean they're not there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As usual, anone attacking people who believe in the concept of IP owners being paid gets modded up like some insightfull genius. how tragic.
Re: (Score:2)
I see you still think treating ideas as property is the *only way for people to get paid for their work.
you might also note I wasn't modded at all. oh well
Re: (Score:2)
Slashdot: We take votes on the truth.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with you 100%, that this is a simple issue and we shouldn't take people's IP without their permission, now we just have the amazing semantic problem of what it means to take something that is (essentially) a thought.
Now I think we can all agree that listening to an artists music on the radio would not be immoral, but what about if we record that show (commercials and all)?
Re: (Score:2)
That depends on whether or not the software is patented. OK, maybe not, but here's my thoughts. My biggest problem with software patents is that software gets the quadruple threat of IP protection.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, copyright protection allows the limitation of distributing unathorized copies. Nothing much about copying, just about distribution.
Patent protection is about a concept, not a specific implementation. So the idea of "source disclosure" doesn't really apply - you aren't patenting a specific piece of software but patenting the idea that the software is making use of it.
Trade secret is the traditional means of p
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But for which of those cases is permission even required? Is it reasonable for the answer to be "all of them?" Is it reasonable for the answer to be "none of them?" There are people who would say "yes" to the second, and people who would say "yes" to the third, so it's not as cut-and-dried an issue as you seem to think. That's what the discussion ought to be about.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What about the situation where, I as an academic am at least partially paid by a university to publish papers? Most academic publishers will take the copyright of my work if they publish it (despite the fac
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Materials © 2006 (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A favour to ask (Score:5, Funny)
But would you be able to ask your professor to bring back bootleg copies of X-Men 3 and Microsoft Office for me? Thanks!
If these are computer students (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't focus on individual ethics (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you a BSA drone or something? Copyright law only ma
Re: (Score:2)
Music (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Music (Score:5, Interesting)
Play the class a few bars of "Pretty fly for a white guy" by Offspring - specifically the part that includes the words "Gunter glieben glauchen globen".
Ask the class if you owe Offspring money because you used their work? Lead into 'fair use' exemptions.
Play Def Leppard's song "Rock of Ages" - specifically the part that offspring sampled the words "Gunter glieben glauchen globen" from. Ask the class if Offspring owe Def Leppard money? Lead into the way both artists signed their copyrights away.
Play "Weird Al" Yankovic's "Pretty Fly for a Rabbi". Ask the class if he owes Offspring money, and if Offspring should have the right to say "no don't mess with our song".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
look at www.groklaw.net for issues of the day (Score:1)
Natural Right Versus Common Good (Score:2)
The most common and fundamental disagreement I hear with regard to intellectual property ethics is a disagreement about why people have intellectual property rights and to what degree they should have them. Most educated individuals understand in abstract terms that intellectual property rights are artificial rights, granted in an effort to engineer a greater common good by restricting the rights of "consumers" for the profit of "creators." A fair number, however, do nto yet grasp this concept and most do n
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that the first copyright (queen anne) had nothing to do with commerce?
Umm, copyright, under other names, long predates the Statute of Anne, which actually replaces a stationers' legal monopoly on printing of books. The statute to which you refer certainly had a lot to do with commercial interests.
Ask them (Score:2)
I would teach the class based on the current topics: file sharing, copyright extension (make sure that they understand the differences between copyright and trademark) public domain, gpl's philosphy. But also bring up issues such as Turnitin.com which has been discussed here (i'm too lazy to look it up) and the fact that this is a business founded on taking student's intellectual property. I wouldn't be a
Tell them what they're allowed to do (Score:2)
Discuss Section 8 (Score:4, Insightful)
Allowing one to profit from his effort is certainly a method of promoting progress. But absurdly long copyright or patent terms promote coasting, not progress - a fact that our legislators seem to have ignored.
Teach them that IP is misleading as a term (Score:1)
Please... someone teach them. They are not the same thing and they are *NOT* about how to make sure you paid or that you have some right to get paid. It is about giving people protections by law to encourage innovation in a world where
please teach these .... (Score:2)
A violent protest against Patents [slashdot.org]
A Bitter protest against copyrights [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Fair Use, Copyright Terms, and Sharing (Score:3, Interesting)
-------------------
If I wanted to do a report on the cultural influence of Star Wars, would it be OK to download from the Internet a screen capture of the Death Star to compare to the AT&T logo, also downloaded?
Would it be OK to break the encryption on a DVD to get a picture of the Death Star to compare to the AT&T logo?
What about the sounds that Jar Jar Binks makes versus an historical African American portrayal such as Gone with the Wind? Can I get those?
What about a video of his walk when compared to the same figures walking or dancing? Can I get those?
Does the law allow this? (DMCA - probably not)
Item 2: What about copyright terms in different countries?
--------------------
IIRC Australia has a 50 year limit on copyright. Is it OK for an Australian to post for free scans of 51 year old books on the Internet?
What about 51 year old movies? 51 year old songs?
Is it OK to listen to those songs in the USA or Canada?
Should the ISP block that access?
Who gets to decide what's on that block list?
Item 3: Sharing - Where do we draw the line?
---------------------
Is it OK to make a mix CD or mix tape for a friend?
Is it OK to rip a CD to make MP3s on my computer?
How many copies of those MP3s can I make for personal use?
Is it OK to keep the MP3s if my original CDs are destroyed in a fire?
Is it OK to make a mix CD with some of my friend's MP3 songs and some of mine?
Is it OK for both of us to back up that CD as MP3s?
Is it OK to mix my entire MP3 collection with my friend's entire MP3 collection?
Is it OK to do that with everyone I meet on the Internet?
Is it OK to do each of these things with movies?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Had. Before we welcomed our new American overlords with the free trade agreement in 2005.
The Problem of infinite profit of finite work... (Score:2)
And artificial scarcity of digital goods intellectual property owners attempt to combat. When really once a company achieves a safe profit threshold on a product any piracy does not really do "hurt" them economically at all for digital goods. I think artificial scarcity is one of the biggest issues that really needs to be discussed, and the whole supply/demand economic reasoning of capitalism goes out the wind
Re: (Score:2)
One dictionary and 30 seconds at the very beginning of the class will put this question to bed very quickly.
Re:The Problem of infinite profit of finite work.. (Score:2)
When really once a company achieves a safe profit threshold on a product any piracy does not really do "hurt" them economically at all for digital goods.
Sounds like someone drank the karl marx koolaid. The basis of IP rights is not whether you've profitted sufficiently (which is impossible to measure anyway), but the advancement of the arts. By setting a bar based on how commercially successful a product is, you punish the successful and deny them the funds to do their next big thing.
Lastly, lot's of g
Re: (Score:2)
There is NO contract. When something is bought, people barely understand anything beyond knowing that money gets exchanged for a good. Not to mention we're talking about intellectual works here who's supply is infinite.
"So what if you paid for the product? If you want to do derivative works, you should first negotiate with the copyright holder. Nobody owes you anything if you do a lot of work
Re: (Score:2)
There is NO contract. When something is bought, people barely understand anything beyond knowing that money gets exchanged for a good.
That's a contract - goods for money.
Not to mention we're talking about intellectual works here who's supply is infinite.
Irrelevant.
The success of any product or business depends on those other people existing in the first place, you act like these people operate or produce in a vacuum, they do not.
That's how it is for everything. You haven't said anything that hasn
Re: (Score:2)
Of course people who make/own IP/software and write EULA's for such software would disagree with you that the above is the 'true' substance of "the contract" or "agreement" they have between their customer and themselves when they make the purchase.
"Irrelevant."
Infinite supply and negligable reproduction costs is certainly not irrelevant. It enables new aspects of economic distribution impossible under traditional scarcity based models. Do you think current economic t
Re: (Score:2)
Of course people who make/own IP/software and write EULA's for such software would disagree with you that the above is the 'true' substance of "the contract" or "agreement" they have between their customer and themselves when they make the purchase.
who cares? The Supreme Court has given weight to the notion that you can trat shrinkwrap software similarly to buying a CD.
Infinite supply and negligable reproduction costs is certainly not irrelevant. It enables new aspects of economic distribution impossib
Re: (Score:2)
This shows me your ignorance. No it is in fact a damn important question whether someone has profited sufficiently considering the economics, of both scarce and non-scarce goods whose supply is not limited and the social effects of of what happens in markets. I'm not saying that people who produce IP should be punished or we should live in communist
Non-distinction Between Invention At Work or Home (Score:2)
Re:Non-distinction Between Invention At Work or Ho (Score:2)
Their arguments typically revolve around you not having sufficient knowledge of the problem space if not for your employment, therefore the work belongs to them. It's your basic fruit-from-the-poison-tree argument
Of course, there's a presumption that knowledge of the field in general is not specific to a single employer, so it isn't really valid to say that. Put another way, if that argument was allowed, then the employer could prevent you from seeking employment based on experience with them, since you
Re:Non-distinction Between Invention At Work or Ho (Score:2)
umm... anything? (Score:1)
On the other hand, if you are just planning lecturing about the law and what defines IP for 75
Invite Lessig (Score:2)
Invite Lessig to speak for the day. Or at least read up on some of the issues he commonly raises.
Spend fifteen minutes describing the cultural myths and legends and parables which existed in many cultures, and how Disney cherry-picked them to build its corporate empire. As soon as Disney made it big, they continually bought legislation to make it impossible for other people to build off this generation's cultural bedrock in the same way. (Not to sound too biased, heh.) Then open up the discussion the
Just an idea (Score:2)
First come up with a simple task, something that has one or two fairly obvious solutions- maybe use some of those logic questions that were really popular in IT interviews a while back, like how to tell which of three lightbulbs goes with which of three light switches from another room when you can only look once, etc.
Next, break the students up into teams. Give each team the p
Ways to Spice it Up (Score:2)
How about Copyright Sock Puppet Theater? Really they should be teaching IP law fundamentals from an early age. If enough of those kids see something wrong with it, they might actually change it at some point in the future...
Downstream Impact of Patents (Score:1)
Does the patent holder on discovery B effectively have a license (monopoly profit) on any developments which use B as a stepping stone? Should they (Such rights arguably increase the economic incentive to research and generate patents the same way that an Amway distribution chain creates an economic incentive to be hig
The Joke Behind Intellectual "Property" (Score:2)
Just as the perception of reality is relative to the observer, so are ideas. Eventually a shared idea will be improved upon, time and time again each
my question: how do you stop it? (Score:2)
So is 'finding a way to stop it' a valid option? Does education work? Is there a way to enforce the law that does not require giving total control of the internet to some organization, to decide what information you can and cannot access at the moment the request is made?
Perhaps the Stephen King approach would work... (Score:2)
Well, I recall Stephen King once saying that the key to creating terror is to take the ordinary and turn it into something extraordinary. Perhaps this would work with teaching intellectual rights and their issues.
I guess if I was doing it, I'd start with a CD, a DVD, or a book - something that everybody knows an
Intellectual Property and International Developmen (Score:2)
It isn't just software, it is genetic
Incompatability (Score:2)
One of the most interesting points might be how DRM is fundamentally incompatible with free software - if you, the user, are free to view your software's source code and modify it, you are inherently able to disable or otherwise modify the DRM. Then again, this may be a bit much for anyone who isn't already familiar with the concept of software that gives the user the freedoms that geeks always wanted to encourage.
I mean, on the one hand I can see how some people - and especially corporations - want to st
Start with history (Score:2)
Tell the class about the times when the hunters/gatherers would sit around the fire and swap stories songs and music for free.
Speaking of which, I believe many aboriginal societies still do so.
Teach about LimeWire (Score:2)
Volvo's gift(s) to Humanity: Seat Belts & Air (Score:2)
why a company -might- be pursuaded
to share a good idea w/competitors
without seeking license fees from
them...
Swedes are / were / have or had ex-
amples among them, who are or were
real Mensch[en].
Wallenberg & Volvo's decisionmakers
stand among them, as would Alfred
Nobel, despite his explosive inven-
tion(s).
one example: Andreas Pavel (Score:2)
One example: Andreas Pavel - 'father' of the portable personal stereo cassette player [wikipedia.org].
Maybe let's not use buzzword Intelectual property? (Score:2)
I know that this term is specially crafted and created to push law makers into thinking that it must be property, but let's not give up yet.