Comment IP and Science (Score 1) 170
I think that it is interesting to note that intellectual property laws do less to protect the creator of that property than to protect the institution or publisher. In the scientific community, for example, the rights to an article belong either to the journal in which it was published or the institution at which the research was performed. They never belong to the author of the article. In fact, the investigator must PAY a fee in order to have the work published.
As one who is not a libertarian, I am not persuaded by much of this article, but I do see similarities between the current uses of intellectual property rights and their stated origins. I do feel that the interests of those who create and then share their creations with the rest of us, should be respected. I do not think that in today's self-centered world this would happen without legal statutes. Even unenforceable laws are followed more often then moral dictae.
However, it is probably true that these laws should be reformed to protect the creators rather than the marketers. We have become a culture of middle men. Very few of us are true producers. Perhaps we should try to protect those who are.
As one who is not a libertarian, I am not persuaded by much of this article, but I do see similarities between the current uses of intellectual property rights and their stated origins. I do feel that the interests of those who create and then share their creations with the rest of us, should be respected. I do not think that in today's self-centered world this would happen without legal statutes. Even unenforceable laws are followed more often then moral dictae.
However, it is probably true that these laws should be reformed to protect the creators rather than the marketers. We have become a culture of middle men. Very few of us are true producers. Perhaps we should try to protect those who are.
