Founding Fathers are "over done"
I'm sorry, but when I read things like the following snippet, I instantly tune people like this out.
Let us examine this quote and take things to the most basic level.
At this point, we simply acknowledge what someone else has said. Second, we alter the context of what was said and set up our arguement that the source of information is invalid. Invalidating the original context is accomplished by requoting a piece of it and drawing an extension from the original thought. Here, the "how" allows us to extrapolate something else from the wording.
Now, I don't always knee-jerk frown at text that includes the word capitalist, though certain left-ists in our society use the word like a curse. In this case, I begin to have my suspicions because capitalism in this context was qualified with "today's". Yes, the statement is true that "exclusive right" means monopoly in today's capitialist society. That's also what it meant when it was written in the Founding Father's capitalist society. The difference was, back then the entire country was HAPPY to live in the freedom and prosperity of a capitalist society.
This is the most alarming and infuriating statement I've ever read in the gaming industry. I'm tempted to add my "Socialist Content" warning to Brian's blog link.
U.S.-centric? Hey dumbass, which country's laws do you think we've been talking about? What a dipshit.
The Founding Father's have been over done? What the hell does that mean? I might not have Brian's scope, but I haven't seen any "founding father arguements" in context of this discussion.
But, this is typical of people disconnected from reality. Immediately after:
Suddenly, Brian likes capitalism again because it's benefiting him. I think a lot of neo-libs are confused about what they should believe. Thier college proffessors teach them to hate their country, their parents, and themselves for a plethora of reasons, but then faced with the reality of being an adult in the real world, they are torn by the need to drink coffee at Starbucks and own high end computer systems.
Yes, I know what the U.S. Constitution says about copyrights. I focused on how the law encourages "the progress of science and useful arts" in particular. The law does this by giving people a monopoly so that they can profit from their work, which is what "exclusive right" means in today's capitalist society.
To be honest, I was trying to stay away from the "founding fathers" arguments because that's not only U.S.-centric, but also a bit overdone these days. And, although there are examples of people creating things for free, I'd argue that the profit motive is behind a majority of IP creation; remember it doesn't have to be some giant company profiting from IP, it's also small developers like me (and I assume like you) that would like to provide for their families doing what they know best.
Let us examine this quote and take things to the most basic level.
Yes, I know what the U.S. Constitution says about copyrights. I focused on how the law encourages "the progress of science and useful arts" in particular.
At this point, we simply acknowledge what someone else has said. Second, we alter the context of what was said and set up our arguement that the source of information is invalid. Invalidating the original context is accomplished by requoting a piece of it and drawing an extension from the original thought. Here, the "how" allows us to extrapolate something else from the wording.
The law does this by giving people a monopoly so that they can profit from their work, which is what "exclusive right" means in today's capitalist society.
Now, I don't always knee-jerk frown at text that includes the word capitalist, though certain left-ists in our society use the word like a curse. In this case, I begin to have my suspicions because capitalism in this context was qualified with "today's". Yes, the statement is true that "exclusive right" means monopoly in today's capitialist society. That's also what it meant when it was written in the Founding Father's capitalist society. The difference was, back then the entire country was HAPPY to live in the freedom and prosperity of a capitalist society.
To be honest, I was trying to stay away from the "founding fathers" arguments because that's not only U.S.-centric, but also a bit overdone these days.
This is the most alarming and infuriating statement I've ever read in the gaming industry. I'm tempted to add my "Socialist Content" warning to Brian's blog link.
U.S.-centric? Hey dumbass, which country's laws do you think we've been talking about? What a dipshit.
The Founding Father's have been over done? What the hell does that mean? I might not have Brian's scope, but I haven't seen any "founding father arguements" in context of this discussion.
But, this is typical of people disconnected from reality. Immediately after:
And, although there are examples of people creating things for free, I'd argue that the profit motive is behind a majority of IP creation; remember it doesn't have to be some giant company profiting from IP, it's also small developers like me (and I assume like you) that would like to provide for their families doing what they know best
Suddenly, Brian likes capitalism again because it's benefiting him. I think a lot of neo-libs are confused about what they should believe. Thier college proffessors teach them to hate their country, their parents, and themselves for a plethora of reasons, but then faced with the reality of being an adult in the real world, they are torn by the need to drink coffee at Starbucks and own high end computer systems.
posted by Jaycen Rigger at 10:41 PM
1 Comments:
Hey man, it's frustrating whena dill hole like this then makes his VERY NEXT post about the U.S. Bill of Rights and the 1st Ammendment. How can he now become U.S.-centric and wrap himself in Constitutional Protections when he just shrugged it off the post before.
Post a Comment
<< Home