Software Ownership?

[Russell McOrmond]

Sanjay Sodhi wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> I'm writing a paper on software ownership, the legal implications of 
> copyright "theft" and the like.

   I'm the author of a number of articles on the subject of Software 
Copyright, Software Patents, and related exclusive but limited 
government granted monopolies.

   I, like many before me over the last few hundred years, fully reject 
the use of the term "theft" when used in the context of intangibles such 
as the exclusive rights offered by Copyright and Patent law.

   One of the best people to articulate this rejection was Thomas 
Jefferson in 1813, which is why I call this the "Jefferson Debate".

http://www.digital-copyright.ca/Jefferson_Debate

   Many in the International community also reject the use of the term 
"Intellectual Property" which, while the limits to the words are 
understood by lawyers, is a term abused by lobbiests to confuse regular 
citizens (and parliamentarians).

IPR Name DISCLAIMER
http://www.wsis-pct.org/ipr-disclaimer.html


> My major focus is going to be on how 
> downloading copyrighted music, software and movies is theft, and the 
> fact that law has evolved to accommodate technological advances.

   Ignoring the inflammatory but possibly unintended language, you want 
to look at things such as the compulsory licensing for things such as 
public performance of recorded music on radio, compulsory licensing for 
retransmission on cable television, and the Canadian private copying 
regime in Canada.   Each recognizes that the traditional contours of 
copyright of requiring permission for specific public activities is 
economically inefficient (or socially unjustifiable), and thus only 
payment is required and not permission.

   Unfortunately recent governments have forgotten what was done over 
the last hundred years and are heading in the wrong direction with 
things such as "DRM", which is the circumvention of tangible property 
rights and related rights for the sake of protecting some outdated 
business models and some 'new' business models based upon theft.

   Note that while this reference to theft is more correct, it is not 
without its controversies given some people deny the use of that word 
except in cases where something physical is physically removed from 
being accessible by its rightful tangible property owner.


   This is discussed in a few articles recently posted to our site:

What if the builder of your home burnt it down if you changed the locks?
http://www.digital-copyright.ca/node/4221

Locks and doors: obsolete idioms of bygone days
http://www.digital-copyright.ca/node/4222

-- 
  Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
  Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property
  rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition!
  http://www.digital-copyright.ca/petition/ict/

  "The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware
   manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or
   portable media player from my cold dead hands!"