I am strongly convinced that the possession of ideas and creations of the intellect is not possible. In my opinion, only physical things can be possessed, that is, things that are limited, that is, that can only be in one place. The power or the freedom to do with the object what one wants corresponds to the concept of possession. This does not mean, however, that one must expose everything openly. It is ultimately the difference between proprietary solutions, where the “construction manual” is kept to oneself, and the open source philosophy, where this source is accessible to everyone.

As the title says, I would oppose this thesis to your arguments and hope that together we can rethink and improve our positions. Please keep in mind that this can be an enrichment for all, so we discuss with each other and not against each other ;)

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11 year ago

    Do you mean the right of the pen and paper manufacturer or the writer of the book? Because the writer does not let the manufacturer write whatever he wants on his paper.

    • @Rottcodd
      link
      English
      21 year ago

      Though NoIP advocates generally conflate them, the nominal ownership of an original composition and the nominal ownership of a printed copy of that composition are two entirely different topics.