Re: MF Topic August 2004 - Intellectual Property

From: Glenn Bradford (gmbradford19@yahoo.com)
Date: Sat Aug 21 2004 - 15:10:30 BST

  • Next message: Valence: "Re: MF Topic August 2004 - Intellectual Property"

    Hi Rick,

    > R
    > ...if the scheme of IP rights inspires someone to
    > create a new or better idea, that they would not
    > have otherwise created if
    > they didn't think they could profit off of it, is
    > that really "prostitution"?

    Prostitution does sound like a strong charge, but if a
    person exchanges values across levels, such as
    exchanging sex (biological) for money (social), the
    MOQ would say that a prostitution, or immoral
    exchange, of value has taken place. To be consistent,
    the MOQ would also have to say that the same kind of
    thing is happening when intellectual patterns are
    sold. In the first case the money is tainted by the
    sex, and in the second the ideas are tainted by the
    money. I admit that Pirsig does not explicitly discuss
    the morality of trading value between levels, but the
    conclusion I draw above seems to me to be a natural
    consequence of his moral taxonomy.

    IP law's promise of a nice reward might motivate
    people to carry through with their ideas, and that is
    indeed an important element, but I don't think this
    promise inspires the ideas themselves. I tend to think
    that an intellectual pursuit has to be its own reward,
    a personal one.

    > R
    > What if the license holder is
    > collecting fees to recoup
    > his investment rather than to profit, would that be
    > different? I would be
    > very interested to hear your thoughts on that
    > question.

    Yes, I think that would be different. You could argue
    that there are a lot of social costs and costs in
    materials that get included in intellectual
    investments. It is moral to recoup those.

    > R
    > And yet, Pirsig doesn't give LILA away for free (in
    > fact, I surmise that he
    > has become quite wealthy repeatedly selling the
    > movie rights to ZMM and then
    > letting them revert to himself). Of course, that
    > doesn't mean you're not
    > right about what the MoQ would conclude (Phaedrus's
    > conclusion that it's
    > immoral to eat meat when other foods are available
    > doesn't stop him from
    > chowing down on a juicy steak just one chapter
    > later).

    Pirsig once gently explained how all the seeming moral
    hypocracies in Lila could be sidestepped. You see it
    was Pirsig who stated that it's immoral to eat meat
    but it was Phaedrus who actually did the eating. You
    don't think a fictional character has to agree with
    everything the author believes, do you? Ha ha ha.

    As to McWatt's and Glover's efforts to profit off of
    Pirsig's ideas - my topic question asked more
    generally about the morality of selling intellectual
    ideas, but no matter; whether these ideas are your own
    or someone else's, the same reasoning applies and the
    same conclusions are drawn: intellectual ideas should
    not be prostituted for social gain. A friend of mine
    pointed out the moral precedence of intellectual ideas
    in these two cases quite simply by stating, "If this
    is such an important breakthrough in philosophical
    thought, I would want everybody to know for nothing".
    If you sell a book that contains intellectual ideas,
    the MOQ implies that the moral course is to charge the
    customer based on the costs of printing, binding, and
    shipping the book, along with other social costs, but
    not the ideas therein. It follows that if you were to
    borrow such a book it shouldn't cost you anything, and
    this is the thinking behind Ben Franklin's free public
    library system. There is a certain irony in Ant's and
    Glove's enterprising efforts to make money off the MOQ
    and McWatt, who is charging $30 for a mere PDF file,
    is the more morally dubious.

    On the other hand, we might take a different tack and
    revisit the agreement from a few months ago that money
    is a social pattern. If money is seen instead as more
    of a purified form of static value potential that is
    exchangable with value at any level, then we might be
    less psychologically burdened by the immorality of
    inter-level exchanges.

    Glenn

    __________________________________________________________________
    Switch to Netscape Internet Service.
    As low as $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register

    Netscape. Just the Net You Need.

    New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer
    Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups.
    Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_focus/
    MF Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_focus follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/mf/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Aug 22 2004 - 20:38:34 BST