Slashdot Mirror
Use Open Source? Then You're a Pirate!
superapecommando writes "There's a fantastic little story in the Guardian today that says a US lobby group is trying to get the US government to consider open source as the equivalent to piracy. The International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA), an umbrella group for American publishing, software, film, television and music associations, has asked the US Trade Representative (USTR) to consider countries like Indonesia, Brazil, and India for its 'Special 301 watchlist' because they encourage the use of open source software. A Special 301, according to Guardian's Bobbie Johnson is: 'a report that examines the "adequacy and effectiveness of intellectual property rights" around the planet — effectively the list of countries that the US government considers enemies of capitalism. It often gets wheeled out as a form of trading pressure — often around pharmaceuticals and counterfeited goods — to try and force governments to change their behaviors.'"
I could not agree more !!! It used to be that if you did something for the good of the public you were praised...now it seems we are gonna be prosecuted.
Then you support pirates, which means that you must be guilty of "contributory infringement".
In all seriousness, though, times like this are perfect example of the difference between free marketeers and scumsucking rent-seeking corporatists who don't deserve to live.
Anybody who makes, and in public no less, the argument that OSS software, voluntarily released by its owners under particular licences, is a "threat to intellectual property" is simply making the petulant demand that "intellectual property" be made to equal "Payments to me, in perpetuity". The intellectual dishonesty is breathtaking.
Institution of International Pathetic Asshats. Here is what that haven of piracy Canada has to say about it when they were put on the list: "Canada does not recognize the Special 301 process due to its lacking of reliable and objective analysis, and we have raised this issue regularly with the U.S. in our bilateral discussions." Even our mild mannered neighborino to the North told them to go suck an egg. I have yet to see any reason why being on that list should bother a country in the slightest.
"I'm not a quack, I'm a mad scientist! There's a difference." - Dr. Cockroach
OSS is free market enterprise and has nothing to do with socialism.
Socialism is when the government forcefully confiscates someones time, money or resources and gives it to someone else.
OSS is 100% voluntary and thus is free market enterprise. Voluntary associations are essential to any capitalist society because individuals and corporations can not fill the needs of everyone.
The kind of society we are living in now is Piracy, where large corporations can keep their profits and then plunder the public treasury when things go bad. Piracy is what this IIPA organization is advocating, not capitalism.
As funny as it may sound, when you freely give away your time and money to a cause, such as OSS you are being a capitalist and when you pay any non-voluntary taxes you are participating in socialism.
If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
If you use open source, then you're a pirate? Ok, slap him in prison. go on, I'd love to see them try :)
Make no mistake: we're in a propaganda war. You might call it "marketing" or "public relations" or "lobbying" or whatever else you want to call it, but the intention is the same. Publishers of games, books, movies, music, and software are all trying to convince you of a particular view of "intellectual property". They're not trying to convince you through honest rational arguments, but rather through logical fallacies and mass brainwashing.
They're trying to convince us all that they are, as industries, entitled to exist, and entitled to a governmental guarantee of profitability. They're trying to convince us that copyright was always considered an inalienable human right, and that authors of creative works have always been entitled to absolute control of their creations in perpetuity. Further, they're trying to convince us that they, the publishers, are the true authors of these works. The guy who wrote the song or the novel, the band who performed the song, the developer who actually wrote the code-- these people are just employees. They're assistants in the process, but the company who funded the work is the true author, and the only one entitled to protection.
That's the propaganda being sold to the public. Don't think for a second that we're involved in an honest debate.