Journal: RMS is a supporter of a perpetual monopoly on derived works

Ok I was talking to Richard M. Stallman about how the word 'copyright' should be added to his _Some_Confusing_or_Loaded_Words_and_Phrases_that_are_Worth_Avoiding_ becouse it is used to refer to everything from a "...right of authors to attributation.'" to 'a perpetual monopoly on derived works' and he repliys
"Yes, that is what I believe. I do not think that copyright is entirely bad."

+++++

Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 10:02:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Panthera Altaica"
Subject: A Confusing or Loaded Words RMS engouages you to use?
To: r_m_s_at_g_n_u_dot_o_r_g

Dear R.M. Stallman

I am disappoited in your essay
_Some_Confusing_or_Loaded_Words_and_Phrases_that_are_Worth_Avoiding_.

In this leter I use the term Author in it's common meaning 'a person
who writes a novel, poem, essy, ect,; the composer a lterary work, as
distinguished from a compiler, translator, editor, or copyist.' Note
that copyright law calls all of the later as 'authors'.

Not only do you miss listing copyright as one of them you encouraage
it's use. Under 'Intellectual property' you say "It is best to talk
specifically about "copyright,"..."

What they call "copyright," "patents," and "trademarks" are simuler in
that fact that they are all adbrigdments of freedom of expresion under
the guiss of promoting the public good.

But of the four things lumped together and called copyright that I have
disstingished between sofar the only thing in common is that the
supports of the idea of 'copyright' want them cunfuzed for each other.

They are in cronicogical order
1. The moral right of authors to attributation. Alegidly traced back to
the ancient Greek and Roman authors.

2. The physhical proporty right of the own, not the author as some like
to claim, of a copy of a work to decide if his copy may be copyed.
Traces back to 6th century in the fammus case of the Finnen vs. Patron
Saint of the Free Flow of Knowledge Columcille (AKA Columba) where King
Diarmaid ruled "Le gach bain a bainín agus le gach leabhar a leabhrán."
'With each cow its cowlet hence with each book its booklet. Did not
create a monopoly becouse every own of a copy of a work could make
futher copys of it

3. the exclusive right to make copies, license, and otherwise exploit a
literary work. These first monopolies on the who can make copys of a
work where started in letters patent, such as the letters patent
granted by Henry III in 1534 to the Chancellor of the University of
Cambridge to appoint three printers who, within the University, could
print and publish any books of which the Chancellor and three doctors
approved. then in 1547 Edward VI granted a monopoly to the King's
printer over a number of specific categories of material. In 1556the
Stationer's Company was established by royal charter for censorship
then in 1586 Star Chamber Decrees gaven a monopoly on all printing.
then continued in a series of Licensing Acts that ended in 1695.

4. The so called 'economic justice' for 'authors'. thou by 'economic
justice' they mean bribery and as mentioned at the start of this letter
they have their one diffinition of the word 'authors'. This started in
the Statute of Anne in 1710. This is not the right of the author to
sell the right to exploit his work as is now claimed. An author had
that befor with his "Le gach bain a bainín agus le gach leabhar a
leabhrán." right by not giving up a copy to the publishing tell paid
for. It was, from the Statute of Anne, "...after the Expiration of the
said Term of Fourteen Years, the sole Right of Printing or Disposing of
Copies shall return to the Authors thereof, if they are then Living,
for another Term of Fourteen Years." After the first 14 years the
Proprietor didn't get another 14 years if the Author was still alive
the Author did. This secont term, the one where he knows how populer
his work is and can set an approprite price, is the bribe they offered
authors becouse under the the earlyer monopoly of the Stationer's
Company Authors had stopped haveing thier workd published rather than
see them exploited by others.

Dr. Panthera Tigris Altaica

__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com

+++++

X-Apparently-To: d_r_a_l_t_a_i_c_a_at_y_a_h_o_o_dot_c_o_m via 68.142.200.150; Sun, 02 Oct 2005 10:08:49 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [199.232.76.164]
Return-Path:
Authentication-Results: mta242.mail.mud.yahoo.com from=gnu.org; domainkeys=neutral (no sig)
Received: from 199.232.76.164 (EHLO fencepost.gnu.org) (199.232.76.164) by mta242.mail.mud.yahoo.com with SMTP; Sun, 02 Oct 2005 10:08:49 -0700
Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1EM7KT-0005ue-63; Sun, 02 Oct 2005 13:08:49 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
From: "Richard M. Stallman"
To: "Panthera Altaica"
In-reply-to: (message from Panthera Altaica on Sat, 1 Oct 2005 10:02:21 -0700 (PDT))
Subject: Re: A Confusing or Loaded Words RMS engouages you to use?
Reply-to: [e-mail]
References:
Message-Id:
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 13:08:49 -0400
Content-Length: 428

        Not only do you miss listing copyright as one of them you encouraage
        it's use. Under 'Intellectual property' you say "It is best to talk
        specifically about "copyright,"..."

Yes, that is what I believe. I do not think that copyright is
entirely bad.

In any case, "copyright" is not particularly a loaded word,
and it does not _cause_ confusion. Whatever one's opinion about
copyright law, one can use that term.