Intellectual property
|
This page is a seed article. You can help Issuepedia water it: make a request to expand a given page and/or donate to help give us more writing-hours!
|
Overview
As works of a largely informational nature (art, music, writing, computer programs) become an increasingly significant part of our daily lives and increasingly easier to copy, the traditional rights of the creator to control (and profit from) copying are undergoing intensive re-examination.
Counter-movements have arisen to produce freely-copyable works in all of these categories, the best-known of which is the open source movement.
Technically, pure ideas are not supposed to be copyrightable or patentable; what is protected is the expression of the idea, not the idea itself. In practice, however, patents are being granted for such in large numbers, e.g. the Amazon "one-click checkout" patent.
Related Articles
- Copy Protection is often used to prevent illegal copying of intellectual property.
Links
- Free Culture UK: for the promotion of free (freely copyable) works of art and culture
- The Pirate Party: supporting copyright reform (there are sister sites for several other countries)
- Eric's Commentary on the Shutdown of MathWorld: how an author was sued for copyright infringement of his own work by CRC Press (formerly the Chemical Rubber Company). This is a good illustration of how corporate ownership of copyrights seems to compel agents of said corporations to behave like utter jerks.
Satire
- Creators' Rights: underscores the "Millennium" in "Digital Millennium Copyright Act"
Notes
Not sure where things like Creative Commons fall in the "movement" scheme; are they aligned with open source in any way? Should I be saying "counter-movements" (plural) or "a counter movenent" (singular)? Is there a more general "openness" movement which embraces things like open business? Is "open source" related to transparency, and if so how? --Woozle 15:08, 2 July 2006 (EDT)