Who gave you the right... (Score 1)

Products are not ideas, information or concepts; they are applications of ideas, services applied to information and creations based on concepts. Where opponents of copywrite go way too far is when they fail to differentiate between the insubstantial, un-owneable basis for a product and the product itself.

Examples include "universal protocol for computer networks" vs. IP, "the novel" vs. The Pelican Brief, "software for the creation and manipulation of business data" vs. Microsoft Office, "music" vs. Metallica's ouvre, "statistics on government spending" vs. a non-fiction book organizing the data into a cohesive argument, "encryption" vs. PGP.

For our society and our citizens to be truly free, each of us must be open to to make use of the former in each pair: to create based on concepts; to conceive of, use and spread ideas; to analyze and share information with no interference from the powers that be - business, governement or the consumer mob.

For our society to be fair and just, however, the people whose efforts brings into existence the latter half of each pair must be allowed to charge for their services rendered or for the products created. On the flip side of this argument, those who wish to create these products or render these services for free must also be allowed to do so. The rights of any one group of citizens must not override those of another; consumers must be free to choose what products to use - free or otherwise - and producers must be free to choose whether to charge (and what to charge) for their products and services.

I understand the anger, the frustration and the poverty driving this movement. I can't afford to buy CD's at $12 CAD a pop, nor can I afford $850 CAD for Adobe Photoshop. Similarly, monopolies piss me off and companies patenting or copywriting ideas, concepts and information gall me. Is using a logical and warranted fight against the latter issues as justification for stealing the former the right answer? No. There are other legal options, including living without. No amount of desire for a product or anger against market forces can justify taking something against someone's will - especially when none of the products are necessities.

Perhaps we should examine what needs to be fixed before we start swinging the hammer. Companies should necessarily be restricted from "owning" ideas, concepts and information - all of which should rightly be free. Amend copywrite and patent law to reflect this.

Otherwise, stop tearing someone else down and start building yourself up! Believe art should be free? Make it and give it away. Believe in free software? Write it and put it on the Web. You have the legally defensible right to do either.

You do not, however, have the right to force others to live by your philosophy, whether the Internet makes it easy to do so or not.