| |||||||||||||
Villa: Pushing back against licensing and the permission cultureVilla: Pushing back against licensing and the permission culturePosted Jan 30, 2013 1:42 UTC (Wed) by robert_s (subscriber, #42402)In reply to: Villa: Pushing back against licensing and the permission culture by wagerrard Parent article: Villa: Pushing back against licensing and the permission culture
> I begin with the premise that when I make something -- software, music, a book, a table, an apple pie, anything -- I own that thing and all the rights entangled with it. No one has some kind of mystical right to use, borrow, copy, sell or eat what I make unless I say so. In effect, rights to the things I make come from me, not the universe.
It's pretty unusual to start with a premise that has the concept of a "right" totally inverted.
"Rights" usually only come into play when someone is harmed by the actions of another. The only "right" I can think of here that is "mystical" is the one that hypothetically exists over all your worldly thoughts before any conflict has even come into play.
Though perhaps we should look at what you mean by "mystical". I'm assuming you mean more or less "god given" or "innate". So if we re-read your statement again it rather implies that you believe any rights a human has to do anything must be explicitly granted. Which is a bit of a strange viewpoint unless you're Pol Pot.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||||