• @Mchugho
    link
    English
    -1
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    deleted by creator

    • @reagansrottencorpse
      link
      English
      31 year ago

      You do understand that doesn’t mean you’d lose your house and toothbrush correct?

      • @Mchugho
        link
        English
        3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        deleted by creator

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

          Do you think what is essentially “Oooh, I bet that upsets you” is conducive to good faith conversation? Or even just general pleasantness?

          If I asked you “Are you lashing out from fear that you won’t survive the revolution?”, that would be unkind. It would come across as hostile, confrontational and I would be presupposing your own thoughts on society and your relation to it.

          Instead, I’ll engage with you as close to your own terms as I’m able: Do you think your country’s intellectual property laws are fit for purpose?

          • @Mchugho
            link
            English
            1
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            deleted by creator

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

              Far more fit for purpose than scrapping the concept altogether as this graphic suggests.

              But they are broken though, aren’t they? Like there aren’t any authors going “Oh gee, if I couldn’t guarantee the rights to my works for over half a century after I dead then I’d pack in this writing lark and go and work at the widget factory”.

              You see laws evolve when they are deemed to no longer be fit for purpose, IP laws are constantly reviewed through case law.

              We’re talking about revolution, not evolution. Legislation, not interpretation. I’m asking if you were told to rip out the laws and start again, what would you do? Is that not a more interesting conversation than explaining to me how case law works?

              I mean if you want to play “I work in IP LOL Lefty snowflake tears” then sure. Do that. Hope you have a nice time with it. Seems boring though.

              • @Mchugho
                link
                English
                1
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                deleted by creator

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

                  Sounds like you’re trying to school a highly qualified professional in something that you’ve only just googled 5 minutes ago. I see Lemmy is just like Reddit in that way.

                  Nobody is “schooling” anyone, friend. You brought up IP, I attempted to engage with you because I thought you wanted to talk about it. And now you’re crying about nobody can disagree with a “highly qualified professional” and have turned a request for you to share your thoughts and experience into a confrontation.

                  just trying to think about sensible policy that’s workable in reality

                  That’s literally what I’ve been trying to do. To get you to tell me what you think sensible policy is.

                  I think I’m upsetting you, so I’m going to disengage now. Hope your day gets better, mate.

                  • @Mchugho
                    link
                    English
                    1
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    deleted by creator

      • @Mchugho
        link
        English
        -2
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        deleted by creator

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Many theories propose making a distiction between private and personal ownership. You own your house and your toothbrush, but you can’t solely own the company that extracts value from the labor of other people.