[p2p-research] Fwd: [fcforum] Fw: iPad DRM is a dangerous step backward. Sign the petition!

[M. Fioretti]

On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 15:34:57 PM +0000, Andy Robinson (ldxar1 at gmail.com) wrote:
> Marco, you're still missing the points that:
> 
> 1) you're only at risk of being 'starved for it' because the current
> system is coercive, and

I am not missing this point. I have simply, deliberately limited
myself in this thread to one single aspect among the many covered:
explaining why I am convinced that abolishing vs reforming copyright
before changing the whole social system would make more harm than
good. I haven't even opened the other messages in this thread yet,
just to not lose focus.

> 2) you're making a big leap that the abolition of copyright would
> destroy any of these sources of income.
> 
> You must live a very un-intense life however, if you really would
> not 'throw a tantrum' as you put it, at alterations which require
> you to change your line of work. It says very worrying things about
> the emotional status of alienated society,

or maybe it just says that I do live a very intense life, just not
centered (restricted) around my current or other potential line of
work, that is that I don't let my work possess me, even if I enjoy it
and think it could help a tiny bit to make the world a better
place. There are plenty of things in my life that are as much or more
important for me than what we've discussed here, but are all things
that I simply have nor time nor, very frankly, any need to discuss in
any public online forum.

Alterations that require changing one's line of work are worth
throwing a tantrum only if you have nothing else in your life but work
_or_ they radically alter what you really care about _outside_ work.

> While a particular relation or a particular person can be damaged,
> to speak of 'damage to society' is fallacious.

Please note that "damage to society" is exactly what almost all total
abolitionists always call the current copyright, so (even if I can't
exclude there are other reasons, of course) using that term may also
be a simple natural reaction to their practice, or a mere
communication strategy: if you want to quickly explain something to
somebody, don't digress _and_ use their default language, even if
theoretically it isn't the best possible one.

			Marco
-- 
Your own civil rights and the quality of your life heavily depend on how
software is used *around* you:            http://digifreedom.net/node/84