Okay, so let's
read this interview with Cory
Doctorow of EFF and see who's rhetoric is the more extreme and inflammatory,
that of the defenders of the property-rights model of innovation, or that
of the IP skeptics.
I always link to these things so you can go to the primary source, but I'll also quote some of the most amusing bits of the interview.
"Incredibly dangerous to their body politic"?
Okay, so those who believe in intellectual property protection are the "forces of darkness." And those who are in the business of promoting intellectual property protection are "openly dishonest."
Wow.
By the way, we've already demonstrated that it's the IP skeptics who are better candidates for the "openly dishonest" label.
Please from now on spare me this rhetoric that somehow it's pro-IP people who view the debate in an over-simplistic way.
No, you're not, Cory. The vast majority of lawyers, economists, and citizens support the basic idea of intellectual property. It's just that we didn't realize at first the danger posed by a small group of activist rabble-rousers like Cory Doctorow. But now we're getting active and engaged. The opposition has showed up, and they won't have their silly rhetoric and bad economics go unopposed any longer.
I always link to these things so you can go to the primary source, but I'll also quote some of the most amusing bits of the interview.
WIPO and the World Trade Organization's intellectual property instruments together foisted a lot of policies on the developing world that required them to adopt knowledge goods laws that were incredibly dangerous to their body politic.
"Incredibly dangerous to their body politic"?
We have kicked stupendous quantities of ass at WIPO. The reason we've been able to do it is that they're flabby. They forces of darkness have never encountered the forces of light there, so they've gotten sloppy and openly dishonest. They're accustomed to strong arming developing world countries. They're unused to the power of citizen networks.
Okay, so those who believe in intellectual property protection are the "forces of darkness." And those who are in the business of promoting intellectual property protection are "openly dishonest."
Wow.
By the way, we've already demonstrated that it's the IP skeptics who are better candidates for the "openly dishonest" label.
Please from now on spare me this rhetoric that somehow it's pro-IP people who view the debate in an over-simplistic way.
So many of the arguments that knowledge goods industries make for extending their reach are really naked self-interest and rhetorical tricks. Any one NGO might not have the expertise to counter them, but together, we're doing a better and better job of exposing them. And once they've been exposed, the arguments for extending the public domain are just obvious. So, we're winning.
No, you're not, Cory. The vast majority of lawyers, economists, and citizens support the basic idea of intellectual property. It's just that we didn't realize at first the danger posed by a small group of activist rabble-rousers like Cory Doctorow. But now we're getting active and engaged. The opposition has showed up, and they won't have their silly rhetoric and bad economics go unopposed any longer.