Copyright on the Internet. What here special? Part 2
I there was an evening, and there was a morning. Also continuation of philosophic exercises on a subject takes place: how to be with the stranger if found him in the Network and it is necessary for you. Moral standards are various
in different societies and change in time. And what in the form of the single phenomenon looks deviation and ugliness, gaining mass character, becomes the rule and norm.
Threw at the first gentleman in the cylinder stones. After a while to appear in society without cylinder - fi, the sir!
When at me at school filched the composition, and then according to it different ogloyeda of a napoluchala of “five“... I beat one.
I meet the photos in unsigned different places and in the form of pictures for phone now - it - god, it is pleasant! Though kopeks - - an agora from it I have no cent.
Precepts of law - an essence continuation ethical, recorded in the form of laws. Someone told that the policy is an art possible. As it is not visible to an opportunity to stop or direct in “correct“ (it in our opinion - correct) the party process of depreciation of copyright in understanding habitual to us, it is not necessary to speak about carrying out any concrete “reasonable policy“.
It is necessary to watch the direction of these changes and to build the behavior according to ethical (and then and legal) the status in this sphere. Where this evolution will bring - I do not know, I am not Darwin. But it is necessary to correspond to the standards which developed at the moment. Otherwise to us it will be as inconvenient as to the person in a tuxedo on the beach or naked on cocktail of high society.
It is represented that the aspiration to a profit - auri sacra fames - and is the progress engine. We would not sport in jeans and would not fly in airplanes if Portuguese and Spaniards were not stunned by desire to profit on Indian spices.
As far as I remember Willie`s “Biology“ published in the same regions, evolution goes three ways: aromorphosis (complication and eminence), idioadaptation (“horizontal“ way) and general degeneration (niskhozhdeniye). But on all three ways the biota solves the main task - a survival in the changed environment.
Authors - they are live creatures too. In one way or another will survive, without the grace will not leave us. And that you did not doubt... “Pris: “Our earth falls into decay, immorality and corruption prosper. Children ceased to obey the parents, everyone wants to write the book. And the doomsday is already close“.
Priss`s papyrus is dated 3350th year BC. It is possible to think, people though a droplet changed for some five with small thousands of years!
Whether it is possible to proceed from the provision on existence of the conscientious consumer of information products identical to the consumer of material benefits? Allow to consider this situation wrong owing to basic distinction of consumer goods.
If the author of trousers offered them for sale in the Internet - shop, then it can give their as much as detailed description, having put a highly artistic photo. The consumer needs trousers, and he will use them not differently as having paid the author. Still the consumer - still a copy of trousers - still money. All are happy.
We will take information product. The program, we will tell. In the same the Internet - shop (yes just in shop) the conscientious consumer bought the program. The author received money. Still a program copy - still money. Very much can be. But no more than that. Even if the author sells quite material disk with absolutely impenetrable protection (that in itself the nonsense, but is admissible), what prevents the consumer to involve the program in a local network or just in the computer with a possibility of external access? All family will not get into one trousers, and the whole CB will get into one program with the complete comfort and pleasure.
And conscience of the consumer is true, and the author at a loss. Further.
In this CB there is a tadpole who (we will return on the guilty earth) cracked the program without the knowledge of our Conscientious and, movable by the ideas of Good, the Evil and other, started in a network World already a bottomless can with uncovered: “Burst misters, for everything it is paid!“ And much still copies the Author will sell?
In the Network there is a huge number of “libraries“, “galleries“ and forums where authors expose absolutely disinterestedly the creations and ideas. But here imagine a situation (real history).
Three students composed the program allowing to define instantly whether this user in a network sits at present, to send it a call and is instant to contact it, awaking on that his desire.
Pushful persons from “Microsoft“ learned about the program and bought it (and all rights) for tens of millions of dollars. Poor students instantly became multimillionaires, and the progressive mankind received “ICQ“ and - da its most. Imagine that “the first in turn“ would be not people of Bill, but some bastards...
“What approaches are unpromising for expansion of space of respect of copyright on the Internet?“ - such question often meets on different LJ and forums.
It is represented to me that technological approaches are unpromising. On any lock there is a master key, against any armor the shell is invented.
If it is impossible to copy, then it is possible to make “a print a screen“. If against it something is thought up, so to photograph the screen the ordinary camera, it without problems. By the way, I saw such devices.
At full technological disability: to put a tracing-paper to the screen and to peredrat, everything that there is. To write off a goose quill in a treasured notebook!
The only reliable protection - impossibility of network access in principle. As in the example given by me earlier with trousers. Advertizing in the Network, and trousers - in a warehouse, and through the Network are really inaccessible. Concerning information products and it will not help, I will not repeat.
Toughening of precepts of law about which often speak as about a life-saver will hardly be effective. What was only not done with thieves: both hands cut, and nostrils tore, and for a willy hung up - a demon I pound. It is known that thieves perfectly facilitated the public taking high esthetic pleasure from a public execution of the thief. That moves the thief: “Here I - will not get“. And pugachevsky: “Once to get drunk live blood“.
Laziness, lack of talent, passion to an extralight profit will overcome (and overcome) any fear. Theft can stop (well, I shucked) - to reduce a situation when it becomes senseless, unprofitable.
Theft will continue while it is profitable. One of solutions - decrease in profitability of theft .
But there is also other moment. Why from theft badly to authors? There are many authors for whom not only it is indifferent, but also it is pleasant to see the creation in others hands. Also is such that are ready to tear the thief in scraps extrajudicially. The first created only for the sake of author`s vanity (as your obedient servant), and the second - counting on profit which they lost. Generally, a difference between a picture in a frame and graffiti. But the author of “a picture in a frame“ has nothing against sale of reproductions and copies. It seems to me, here is over what to think.
There is an experience some Russian fate - group which sells the disks at the price of counterfeit. Though one would be filched! Therefore I speak of a paka and a paka : it is inevitable qualitative (not in sense - good, and in philosophical) transition in all system of the relations the Author-consumer, beginning from ethical to financially - legal. Otherwise - a collapse of all system, extremely, vitally favorable to mankind. For this reason the collapse will not be - there will be something new.
Ethics are plastic and changeable.
To expel the person stark naked on the street - to fatally dishonor him, isn`t it?
Meanwhile to be nude to the people was the honourable privilege of the highest aristocracy in ancient Sparta.
We observe the beginning of very interesting process. Also all becomes farther than “interesaty and interesaty...“