ownership – intellectual property
Perhaps a better focus – intellectual property.
How can we own/claim anything?
We are interconnected and amazingly enough, not that novel. We just think we are, because, perhaps, we’ve been focusing more on a compulsory way of life/proof/mistrust, than on connecting.
Every moment, we are changed. Because of the connecting we do/experience/breath in. How can we claim ownership – as in rights?
[disclaimer – not saying we shouldn’t own our day. perhaps the problem comes when we insist that the day, thoughts, beauty, et al, are anything that only we own. that only we created. that only we can sell or keep from others. it’s about co-creation. share economy. connection economy. and a new/old mindset.]
The tricky part of public thinking is that it works best in situations where people aren’t worried about “owning” ideas. – Clive Thompson, Smarter Than You Think
There is no statement more erroneous than the declaration that “this is my idea”. Such notions are byproducts of a material culture that has been reinforced in seeking physical rewards, usually via money, in exchange for the illusion of their “proprietary” creations. Very often an ego association is culminated as well where an individual claims prestige about their “credit” for an idea or invention.
– Peter Joseph et al, Zeitgeist Movement Defined
my curiosity overrides my sense of ownership
Pushing for copyright monopolies and patent monopolies was never a matter of helping others; it was a matter of kicking away the ladder once you had reached the top yourself.
shared aug 2014 on fb by Charles:
But if we don’t see ownership is a reified category, an absolute predicate, then the matter is not so simple. Because what is this “ownership”? What is the social agreement that the concept embodies? It is rather different than what we have today.
BAMMMMM! Sound of my browser hitting a Taylor and Francis paywall on research paper. $40 to read a paper? WTF WORLD DID WE MAKE?
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/cogdog/status/570283714120278017
from Y Benkler’s wealth of networks
When one cuts through the rent-seeking politics of intellectual property lobbies like the pharmaceutical companies or Hollywood and the recording industry; when one overcomes the honestly erroneous, but nonetheless conscience-soothing beliefs of lawyers who defend the copyright and patent-dependent industries and the judges they later become, the reality of both theory and empirics in the economics of intellectual property is that both in theory and as far as empirical evidence shows, there is remarkably little support in economics for regulating information, knowledge, and cultural production through the tools of intellectual property law.
via Maria: Oliver Jeffers on ownership
This Moose Belongs to Me (public library) — a disarming story about a boy who believes he owns his pet moose Marcel, only to discover that so do other people, who call him by different names, while the moose himself doesn’t quite get the concept of being owned and is thus oblivious to the boy’s list of rules for being a good pet.
the story is, above all, a parable about the nature of ownership as a mutually agreed upon figment and the comical sense of entitlement it engenders.
Perhaps Mark Twain put it best in his supportive letter to Helen Keller when she was accused of plagiarism:“Substantially all ideas are second-hand, consciously and unconsciously drawn from a million outside sources.”
We only own something because everybody agrees that we do.
Researcher illegally shares millions of science papers free online to spread knowledge https://t.co/3i2TUMVEna
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/lessig/status/698206325893963776
may 2016 – Noam
intellectual property is a polite term for govt instituted monopoly pricing rights.. means extraordinarily high patent rights… for phram corps.. to keep price of drugs up and mkae profits astronomical.. probably at least 1/2 of r&d not done by pharma at all.. basic/hard/costly research is done by people like you .. you pay for it through your taxes..
the whole plagiarism of speeches .. when the speeches supposedly plagiarized from.. are written by other people than the ones giving them… those usually invisible people.. how does that work..?
how could we ever thing we own.. invented.. anything.. on our own..
“All ideas are second-hand.” Mark Twain’s magnificent letter to Helen Keller about the myth of originality brainpickings.org/2012/05/10/mar
As if there was much of anything in any human utterance, oral or written, except plagiarism!
Xeni Jardin (@xeni) tweeted at 5:18 AM – 12 Sep 2016 :
European court rules that making a link can be copyright infringement. “This is a fucking disaster,” says @doctorow https://t.co/bi17bNkgmF (http://twitter.com/xeni/status/775292384800309248?s=17)
Peter Martin (@1petermartin) tweeted at 3:50 AM – 20 Dec 2016 :
Copyright rules make us break the law 80 times a day, says Productivity Commission: https://t.co/2ghkjWHwz4 @smh @theage #auspol #ausecon https://t.co/pUVnmjhMRL (http://twitter.com/1petermartin/status/811161725919756288?s=17)
Clo Willaerts (@bnox) tweeted at 4:03 AM – 28 Feb 2017 :
The Real Difference Between Google And Apple
By looking at their patents. https://t.co/Qut6mcS9u7 (http://twitter.com/bnox/status/836532163113807872?s=17)
apple/jobs – 347 patents.. google/brin/page – 27 patents
Patents and copyrights also solved the problem of most knowledge being already held by others for centuries or millennia because it granted ownership not to the origin of knowledge but to the first to file patents, almost always western men.
Patents and copyrights are exclusionary rights. They are not rights to do something but rights to stop others from doing it.
University accreditation and licensing act in the same way.