www/philosophy not-ipr.xhtml

[Richard M. Stallman]

CVSROOT:        /webcvs/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Richard M. Stallman <rms>       06/08/13 13:41:26

Modified files:
        philosophy     : not-ipr.xhtml 

Log message:
        *** empty log message ***

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/not-ipr.xhtml?cvsroot=www&r1=1.8&r2=1.9

Patches:
Index: not-ipr.xhtml
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/not-ipr.xhtml,v
retrieving revision 1.8
retrieving revision 1.9
diff -u -b -r1.8 -r1.9
--- not-ipr.xhtml       23 Jul 2006 16:44:24 -0000      1.8
+++ not-ipr.xhtml       13 Aug 2006 13:41:01 -0000      1.9
@@ -116,6 +116,17 @@
 </p>
 
 <p>
+People often say "intellectual property" when they really mean some
+larger or smaller category.  For instance, rich countries often impose
+unjustr laws on poor countries to squeeze money out of them.  Some of
+these are "intellectual property" laws, but not all; nonetheless,
+people often grab that label because it has become familiar to them,
+and misrepresent the nature of the issue.  It would be better to use a
+term such as "legislative colonization" which gets to the heart of the
+matter and avoids misrepresenting its extent.
+</p>
+
+<p>
 Laymen are not alone in getting confused by this term.  Even law
 professors who teach these laws are lured by the seductiveness of the
 term "intellectual property" into general statements that conflict
@@ -124,11 +135,11 @@
 </p>
 
 <p>
-    Unlike their descendants who now work the floor at WIPO, the
+    "Unlike their descendants who now work the floor at WIPO, the
     framers of the US constitution had a principled, pro-competitive
     attitude to intellectual property. They knew rights might be
     necessary, but...they tied congress's hands,
-    restricting its power in multiple ways.
+    restricting its power in multiple ways."
 </p>
 
 <p>
@@ -139,17 +150,6 @@
 </p>
 
 <p>
-People often say "intellectual property" when they really mean some
-larger or smaller category.  For instance, rich countries often impose
-unjustr laws on poor countries to squeeze money out of them.  Some of
-these are "intellectual property" laws, but not all; nonetheless,
-people often grab that label because it has become familiar to them,
-and misrepresent the nature of the issue.  It would be better to use a
-term such as "legislative colonization" which gets to the heart of the
-matter and avoids misrepresenting its extent.
-</p>
-
-<p>
 The term "intellectual property" also leads to simplistic thinking.
 It leads people to focus on the meager commonality in form of these
 disparate laws, which is that they create artificial privileges for
@@ -272,7 +272,7 @@
 <p>
 Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2006/07/23 16:44:24 $ $Author: rms $
+$Date: 2006/08/13 13:41:01 $ $Author: rms $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>