[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
www/philosophy not-ipr.ar.html not-ipr.el.html ...
|
From: |
GNUN |
|
Subject: |
www/philosophy not-ipr.ar.html not-ipr.el.html ... |
|
Date: |
Sun, 8 Jan 2017 03:59:28 -0500 (EST) |
CVSROOT: /web/www
Module name: www
Changes by: GNUN <gnun> 17/01/08 03:59:28
Modified files:
philosophy : not-ipr.ar.html not-ipr.el.html not-ipr.lt.html
not-ipr.pl.html
philosophy/po : not-ipr.ar-diff.html not-ipr.el-diff.html
not-ipr.pl-diff.html
Added files:
philosophy/po : not-ipr.lt-diff.html
Log message:
Automatic update by GNUnited Nations.
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/not-ipr.ar.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.23&r2=1.24
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/not-ipr.el.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.35&r2=1.36
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/not-ipr.lt.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.2&r2=1.3
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/not-ipr.pl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.33&r2=1.34
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/not-ipr.ar-diff.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.8&r2=1.9
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/not-ipr.el-diff.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.10&r2=1.11
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/not-ipr.pl-diff.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.1&r2=1.2
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/not-ipr.lt-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
Patches:
Index: not-ipr.ar.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/not-ipr.ar.html,v
retrieving revision 1.23
retrieving revision 1.24
diff -u -b -r1.23 -r1.24
--- not-ipr.ar.html 21 Oct 2016 10:32:42 -0000 1.23
+++ not-ipr.ar.html 8 Jan 2017 08:59:27 -0000 1.24
@@ -1,4 +1,9 @@
-<!--#set var="ENGLISH_PAGE" value="/philosophy/not-ipr.en.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="/philosophy/po/not-ipr.ar.po">
+ https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/not-ipr.ar.po</a>'
+ --><!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/not-ipr.html"
+ --><!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/not-ipr.ar-diff.html"
+ --><!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2016-11-09" --><!--#set
var="ENGLISH_PAGE" value="/philosophy/not-ipr.en.html" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/header.ar.html" -->
<!-- Parent-Version: 1.77 -->
@@ -9,6 +14,7 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/not-ipr.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.ar.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.ar.html" -->
<h2>Ø£ÙÙت ”Ù
ÙÙÙØ© ÙÙرÙØ©“Ø Ø¥ÙÙا سراب
Ùاذب</h2>
<p>بÙÙÙ
<a href="http://www.stallman.org/";>رÙتشارد Ø¥Ù
. ستاÙÙ
Ù</a></p>
@@ -285,7 +291,7 @@
<p class="unprintable"><!-- timestamp start -->
ØÙدÙثت:
-$Date: 2016/10/21 10:32:42 $
+$Date: 2017/01/08 08:59:27 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: not-ipr.el.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/not-ipr.el.html,v
retrieving revision 1.35
retrieving revision 1.36
diff -u -b -r1.35 -r1.36
--- not-ipr.el.html 2 May 2015 23:27:18 -0000 1.35
+++ not-ipr.el.html 8 Jan 2017 08:59:27 -0000 1.36
@@ -1,4 +1,9 @@
-<!--#set var="ENGLISH_PAGE" value="/philosophy/not-ipr.en.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="/philosophy/po/not-ipr.el.po">
+ https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/not-ipr.el.po</a>'
+ --><!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/not-ipr.html"
+ --><!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/not-ipr.el-diff.html"
+ --><!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2016-11-09" --><!--#set
var="ENGLISH_PAGE" value="/philosophy/not-ipr.en.html" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/header.el.html" -->
<!-- Parent-Version: 1.77 -->
@@ -9,6 +14,7 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/not-ipr.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.el.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.el.html" -->
<h2>ÎίÏαÏε “ΠνεÏ
μαÏική ÎδιοκÏηÏία”;
Îίναι μία αÏοÏλανηÏική αÏ
ÏαÏάÏη</h2>
<p>αÏÏ Ïον <a href="http://www.stallman.org/";>Richard M. Stallman</a></p>
@@ -353,7 +359,7 @@
<p class="unprintable"><!-- timestamp start -->
ÎνημεÏÏθηκε:
-$Date: 2015/05/02 23:27:18 $
+$Date: 2017/01/08 08:59:27 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: not-ipr.lt.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/not-ipr.lt.html,v
retrieving revision 1.2
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -b -r1.2 -r1.3
--- not-ipr.lt.html 26 Jan 2016 06:35:17 -0000 1.2
+++ not-ipr.lt.html 8 Jan 2017 08:59:28 -0000 1.3
@@ -1,4 +1,9 @@
-<!--#set var="ENGLISH_PAGE" value="/philosophy/not-ipr.en.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="/philosophy/po/not-ipr.lt.po">
+ https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/not-ipr.lt.po</a>'
+ --><!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/not-ipr.html"
+ --><!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/not-ipr.lt-diff.html"
+ --><!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2016-11-09" --><!--#set
var="ENGLISH_PAGE" value="/philosophy/not-ipr.en.html" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/header.lt.html" -->
<!-- Parent-Version: 1.77 -->
@@ -9,6 +14,7 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/not-ipr.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.lt.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.lt.html" -->
<h2>Ar jÅ«s pasakÄte „IntelektinÄ nuosavybÄ“? Tai gundantis
miražas</h2>
<p>pagal <a href="http://www.stallman.org/";>Richard M. Stallman</a></p>
@@ -327,7 +333,7 @@
<p class="unprintable"><!-- timestamp start -->
Atnaujinta:
-$Date: 2016/01/26 06:35:17 $
+$Date: 2017/01/08 08:59:28 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: not-ipr.pl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/not-ipr.pl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.33
retrieving revision 1.34
diff -u -b -r1.33 -r1.34
--- not-ipr.pl.html 16 Jan 2016 00:05:00 -0000 1.33
+++ not-ipr.pl.html 8 Jan 2017 08:59:28 -0000 1.34
@@ -1,4 +1,9 @@
-<!--#set var="ENGLISH_PAGE" value="/philosophy/not-ipr.en.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="/philosophy/po/not-ipr.pl.po">
+ https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/not-ipr.pl.po</a>'
+ --><!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/not-ipr.html"
+ --><!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/not-ipr.pl-diff.html"
+ --><!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2016-11-09" --><!--#set
var="ENGLISH_PAGE" value="/philosophy/not-ipr.en.html" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/header.pl.html" -->
<!-- Parent-Version: 1.77 -->
@@ -9,6 +14,7 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/not-ipr.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.pl.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.pl.html" -->
<h2>„WÅasnoÅÄ intelektualna” to zwodniczy miraż</h2>
<p><a href="http://www.stallman.org/";>Richard M. Stallman</a></p>
@@ -349,7 +355,7 @@
<p class="unprintable"><!-- timestamp start -->
Aktualizowane:
-$Date: 2016/01/16 00:05:00 $
+$Date: 2017/01/08 08:59:28 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: po/not-ipr.ar-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/po/not-ipr.ar-diff.html,v
retrieving revision 1.8
retrieving revision 1.9
diff -u -b -r1.8 -r1.9
--- po/not-ipr.ar-diff.html 19 Jun 2015 08:28:12 -0000 1.8
+++ po/not-ipr.ar-diff.html 8 Jan 2017 08:59:28 -0000 1.9
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
</style></head>
<body><pre>
<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
-<!-- Parent-Version: 1.77 -->
+<!-- Parent-Version: <span
class="removed"><del><strong>1.77</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>1.79</em></ins></span> -->
<title>Did You Say “Intellectual Property”? It's a
Seductive Mirage
- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/not-ipr.translist" -->
@@ -237,11 +237,11 @@
<hr />
<p>
-<span class="inserted"><ins><em>See also <a
href="/philosophy/komongistan.html">The Curious History of
+See also <a href="/philosophy/komongistan.html">The Curious History of
Komongistan (Busting the term “intellectual property”)</a>.
</p>
-<p></em></ins></span>
+<p>
Countries in Africa are a lot more similar than these laws, and
“Africa” is a coherent geographical concept; nonetheless,
<a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/24/africa-clinton">
@@ -253,6 +253,11 @@
<a
href="http://torrentfreak.com/language-matters-framing-the-copyright-monopoly-so-we-can-keep-our-liberties-130714/">
Rickard Falkvinge supports rejection of this term</a>.</p>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p><a
+href="http://www.locusmag.com/Perspectives/2016/11/cory-doctorow-sole-and-despotic-dominion/">
+Cory Doctorow also condemns</a> the term “intellectual
+property.”</p></em></ins></span>
+
</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
<div id="footer">
@@ -285,7 +290,7 @@
<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
- be under CC BY-ND 3.0 US. Please do NOT change or remove this
+ be under CC BY-ND <span class="removed"><del><strong>3.0
US.</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>4.0.</em></ins></span> Please do NOT change or
remove this
without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
@@ -300,17 +305,18 @@
There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
-<p>Copyright © 2004, 2006, 2010, <span
class="removed"><del><strong>2013</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>2013, 2015</em></ins></span> Richard M.
Stallman</p>
+<p>Copyright © 2004, 2006, 2010, 2013, <span
class="removed"><del><strong>2015</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>2015, 2016</em></ins></span> Richard M.
Stallman</p>
<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
-href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/">Creative
-Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>.</p>
+<span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/">Creative</strong></del></span>
+<span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative</em></ins></span>
+Commons <span class="removed"><del><strong>Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United
States</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0
International</em></ins></span> License</a>.</p>
<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
<p class="unprintable">Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2015/06/19 08:28:12 $
+$Date: 2017/01/08 08:59:28 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
Index: po/not-ipr.el-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/po/not-ipr.el-diff.html,v
retrieving revision 1.10
retrieving revision 1.11
diff -u -b -r1.10 -r1.11
--- po/not-ipr.el-diff.html 20 Apr 2015 08:18:47 -0000 1.10
+++ po/not-ipr.el-diff.html 8 Jan 2017 08:59:28 -0000 1.11
@@ -11,9 +11,9 @@
</style></head>
<body><pre>
<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
-<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.77
--></em></ins></span>
+<!-- Parent-Version: <span
class="removed"><del><strong>1.77</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>1.79</em></ins></span> -->
<title>Did You Say “Intellectual Property”? It's a
Seductive Mirage
-- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/not-ipr.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
<h2>Did You Say “Intellectual Property”? It's a Seductive
Mirage</h2>
@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@
overgeneralization. There is no such unified thing as
“intellectual property”—it is a mirage. The only
reason people think it makes sense as a coherent category is that
-widespread use of the term has misled <span
class="removed"><del><strong>them.</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>them about the laws in question.</em></ins></span>
+widespread use of the term has misled them about the laws in question.
</p>
<p>
@@ -87,8 +87,7 @@
</p>
<p>
-<span class="removed"><del><strong>Copyright</strong></del></span>
-<span class="inserted"><ins><em>For instance, copyright</em></ins></span> law
was designed to promote authorship and
+For instance, copyright law was designed to promote authorship and
art, and covers the details of expression of a work. Patent law was
intended to promote the publication of useful ideas, at the price of
giving the one who publishes an idea a temporary monopoly over
@@ -101,8 +100,8 @@
way of acting, but simply to enable buyers to know what they are
buying. Legislators under the influence of the term “intellectual
property”, however, have turned it into a scheme that provides
-incentives for advertising. <span class="inserted"><ins><em>And these are just
-three out of many laws that the term refers to.</em></ins></span>
+incentives for advertising. And these are just
+three out of many laws that the term refers to.
</p>
<p>
@@ -113,7 +112,7 @@
</p>
<p>
-<span class="inserted"><ins><em>In practice, nearly all general statements you
encounter that are
+In practice, nearly all general statements you encounter that are
formulated using “intellectual property” will be false.
For instance, you'll see claims that “its” purpose is to
“promote innovation”, but that only fits patent law and
@@ -134,11 +133,11 @@
creativity; the name “rms tea” isn't creative at all, and
neither is my secret list of tea customers.</p>
-<p></em></ins></span>
+<p>
People often say “intellectual property” when they really
-mean some larger or smaller <span
class="removed"><del><strong>category.</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>set of laws.</em></ins></span> For instance, rich
countries
+mean some larger or smaller set of laws. For instance, rich countries
often impose unjust laws on poor countries to squeeze money out of
-them. Some of these laws are <span class="inserted"><ins><em>among those
called</em></ins></span> “intellectual
+them. Some of these laws are among those called “intellectual
property” laws, and others are not; nonetheless, critics of the
practice often grab for that label because it has become familiar to
them. By using it, they misrepresent the nature of the issue. It
@@ -165,9 +164,9 @@
<p>
That statement refers to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of the US
Constitution, which authorizes copyright law and patent law. That
-clause, though, has nothing to do with trademark <span
class="removed"><del><strong>law</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>law, trade secret
-law,</em></ins></span> or various others. The term “intellectual
property”
-led that professor to make <span class="inserted"><ins><em>a</em></ins></span>
false generalization.
+clause, though, has nothing to do with trademark law, trade secret
+law, or various others. The term “intellectual property”
+led that professor to make a false generalization.
</p>
<p>
@@ -234,9 +233,8 @@
href="http://fsfe.org/projects/wipo/wiwo.en.html">one proposal for
changing the name and substance of WIPO</a>.
</p>
-<span class="removed"><del><strong></div></strong></del></span>
-<span class="inserted"><ins><em><hr />
+<hr />
<p>
See also <a href="/philosophy/komongistan.html">The Curious History of
@@ -255,24 +253,21 @@
<a
href="http://torrentfreak.com/language-matters-framing-the-copyright-monopoly-so-we-can-keep-our-liberties-130714/">
Rickard Falkvinge supports rejection of this term</a>.</p>
-</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above
--></em></ins></span>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p><a
+href="http://www.locusmag.com/Perspectives/2016/11/cory-doctorow-sole-and-despotic-dominion/">
+Cory Doctorow also condemns</a> the term “intellectual
+property.”</p></em></ins></span>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
<div id="footer">
+<div class="unprintable">
-<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
-Please</strong></del></span>
-<span class="inserted"><ins><em><div class="unprintable">
-
-<p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> FSF & GNU inquiries to
-<a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><em>address@hidden</em></a>.</strong></del></span>
<span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.</em></ins></span>
+<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
-the FSF.
-<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
-Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
-to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
-</p>
-
-<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.</p>
+the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
+to <a
href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.</p>
<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
replace it with the translation of these two:
@@ -286,20 +281,16 @@
<p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of
our web pages, see <a
href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
- README</a>. --></em></ins></span>
+ README</a>. -->
Please see the <a
href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
-of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
-</p>
-
-<p>
-Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>article.</p>
+of this article.</p>
</div>
<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
- be under CC BY-ND 3.0 US. Please do NOT change or remove this
+ be under CC BY-ND <span class="removed"><del><strong>3.0
US.</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>4.0.</em></ins></span> Please do NOT change or
remove this
without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
@@ -314,22 +305,18 @@
There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
-<p>Copyright</em></ins></span> © 2004, 2006, <span
class="removed"><del><strong>2010</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>2010, 2013, 2015</em></ins></span> Richard M. <span
class="removed"><del><strong>Stallman
-<br />
-This</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</p>
-
-<p>This</em></ins></span> page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
-href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/">Creative
-Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
-</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+<p>Copyright © 2004, 2006, 2010, 2013, <span
class="removed"><del><strong>2015</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>2015, 2016</em></ins></span> Richard M.
Stallman</p>
-<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+<span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/">Creative</strong></del></span>
+<span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative</em></ins></span>
+Commons <span class="removed"><del><strong>Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United
States</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0
International</em></ins></span> License</a>.</p>
-<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>Updated:</strong></del></span>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
-<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p
class="unprintable">Updated:</em></ins></span>
+<p class="unprintable">Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2015/04/20 08:18:47 $
+$Date: 2017/01/08 08:59:28 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
Index: po/not-ipr.pl-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/po/not-ipr.pl-diff.html,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -b -r1.1 -r1.2
--- po/not-ipr.pl-diff.html 11 Oct 2013 09:28:28 -0000 1.1
+++ po/not-ipr.pl-diff.html 8 Jan 2017 08:59:28 -0000 1.2
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
</style></head>
<body><pre>
<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
-<!-- Parent-Version: 1.75 -->
+<!-- Parent-Version: <span
class="removed"><del><strong>1.77</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>1.79</em></ins></span> -->
<title>Did You Say “Intellectual Property”? It's a
Seductive Mirage
- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/not-ipr.translist" -->
@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@
overgeneralization. There is no such unified thing as
“intellectual property”—it is a mirage. The only
reason people think it makes sense as a coherent category is that
-widespread use of the term has misled them.
+widespread use of the term has misled them about the laws in question.
</p>
<p>
@@ -87,11 +87,12 @@
</p>
<p>
-Copyright law was designed to promote authorship and art, and covers
-the details of expression of a work. Patent law was intended to
-promote the publication of useful ideas, at the price of giving the
-one who publishes an idea a temporary monopoly over it—a price
-that may be worth paying in some fields and not in others.
+For instance, copyright law was designed to promote authorship and
+art, and covers the details of expression of a work. Patent law was
+intended to promote the publication of useful ideas, at the price of
+giving the one who publishes an idea a temporary monopoly over
+it—a price that may be worth paying in some fields and not in
+others.
</p>
<p>
@@ -99,7 +100,8 @@
way of acting, but simply to enable buyers to know what they are
buying. Legislators under the influence of the term “intellectual
property”, however, have turned it into a scheme that provides
-incentives for advertising.
+incentives for advertising. And these are just
+three out of many laws that the term refers to.
</p>
<p>
@@ -110,15 +112,37 @@
</p>
<p>
+In practice, nearly all general statements you encounter that are
+formulated using “intellectual property” will be false.
+For instance, you'll see claims that “its” purpose is to
+“promote innovation”, but that only fits patent law and
+perhaps plant variety monopolies. Copyright law is not concerned with
+innovation; a pop song or novel is copyrighted even if there is
+nothing innovative about it. Trademark law is not concerned with
+innovation; if I start a tea store and call it “rms tea”,
+that would be a solid trademark even if I sell the same teas in the
+same way as everyone else. Trade secret law is not concerned with
+innovation, except tangentially; my list of tea customers would be a
+trade secret with nothing to do with innovation.</p>
+
+<p>
+You will also see assertions that “intellectual property”
+is concerned with “creativity”, but really that only fits
+copyright law. More than creativity is needed to make a patentable
+invention. Trademark law and trade secret law have nothing to do with
+creativity; the name “rms tea” isn't creative at all, and
+neither is my secret list of tea customers.</p>
+
+<p>
People often say “intellectual property” when they really
-mean some larger or smaller category. For instance, rich countries
+mean some larger or smaller set of laws. For instance, rich countries
often impose unjust laws on poor countries to squeeze money out of
-them. Some of these laws are “intellectual property” laws,
-and others are not; nonetheless, critics of the practice often grab
-for that label because it has become familiar to them. By using it,
-they misrepresent the nature of the issue. It would be better to use
-an accurate term, such as “legislative colonization”, that
-gets to the heart of the matter.
+them. Some of these laws are among those called “intellectual
+property” laws, and others are not; nonetheless, critics of the
+practice often grab for that label because it has become familiar to
+them. By using it, they misrepresent the nature of the issue. It
+would be better to use an accurate term, such as “legislative
+colonization”, that gets to the heart of the matter.
</p>
<p>
@@ -140,9 +164,9 @@
<p>
That statement refers to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of the US
Constitution, which authorizes copyright law and patent law. That
-clause, though, has nothing to do with trademark law or various
-others. The term “intellectual property” led that
-professor to make false generalization.
+clause, though, has nothing to do with trademark law, trade secret
+law, or various others. The term “intellectual property”
+led that professor to make a false generalization.
</p>
<p>
@@ -213,13 +237,31 @@
<hr />
<p>
+See also <a href="/philosophy/komongistan.html">The Curious History of
+Komongistan (Busting the term “intellectual property”)</a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Countries in Africa are a lot more similar than these laws, and
+“Africa” is a coherent geographical concept; nonetheless,
+<a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/24/africa-clinton">
+talking about “Africa” instead of a specific country
+causes lots of confusion</a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
<a
href="http://torrentfreak.com/language-matters-framing-the-copyright-monopoly-so-we-can-keep-our-liberties-130714/">
-<span class="removed"><del><strong>Richard</strong></del></span>
-<span class="inserted"><ins><em>Rickard</em></ins></span> Falkvinge supports
rejection of this term</a>.</p>
+Rickard Falkvinge supports rejection of this term</a>.</p>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p><a
+href="http://www.locusmag.com/Perspectives/2016/11/cory-doctorow-sole-and-despotic-dominion/">
+Cory Doctorow also condemns</a> the term “intellectual
+property.”</p></em></ins></span>
</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
<div id="footer">
+<div class="unprintable">
<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to
<a href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
@@ -244,10 +286,11 @@
href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
of this article.</p>
+</div>
<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
- be under CC BY-ND 3.0 US. Please do NOT change or remove this
+ be under CC BY-ND <span class="removed"><del><strong>3.0
US.</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>4.0.</em></ins></span> Please do NOT change or
remove this
without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
@@ -262,17 +305,18 @@
There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
-<p>Copyright © 2004, 2006, 2010, 2013 Richard M. Stallman</p>
+<p>Copyright © 2004, 2006, 2010, 2013, <span
class="removed"><del><strong>2015</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>2015, 2016</em></ins></span> Richard M.
Stallman</p>
<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
-href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/">Creative
-Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>.</p>
+<span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/">Creative</strong></del></span>
+<span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative</em></ins></span>
+Commons <span class="removed"><del><strong>Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United
States</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0
International</em></ins></span> License</a>.</p>
<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
-<p>Updated:
+<p class="unprintable">Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2013/10/11 09:28:28 $
+$Date: 2017/01/08 08:59:28 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
Index: po/not-ipr.lt-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/not-ipr.lt-diff.html
diff -N po/not-ipr.lt-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/not-ipr.lt-diff.html 8 Jan 2017 08:59:28 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,326 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/not-ipr.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<!-- Parent-Version: <span
class="removed"><del><strong>1.77</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>1.79</em></ins></span> -->
+<title>Did You Say “Intellectual Property”? It's a
Seductive Mirage
+- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/not-ipr.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<h2>Did You Say “Intellectual Property”? It's a Seductive
Mirage</h2>
+
+<p>by <a href="http://www.stallman.org/">Richard M.
Stallman</a></p>
+
+<p>
+It has become fashionable to toss copyright, patents, and
+trademarks—three separate and different entities involving three
+separate and different sets of laws—plus a dozen other laws into
+one pot and call it “intellectual property”. The
+distorting and confusing term did not become common by accident.
+Companies that gain from the confusion promoted it. The clearest way
+out of the confusion is to reject the term entirely.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+According to Professor Mark Lemley, now of the Stanford Law School,
+the widespread use of the term “intellectual property” is
+a fashion that followed the 1967 founding of the World “Intellectual
+Property” Organization (WIPO), and only became really common in recent
+years. (WIPO is formally a UN organization, but in fact represents the
+interests of the holders of copyrights, patents, and trademarks.) Wide use
dates from
+<a
href="http://ngrams.googlelabs.com/graph?content=intellectual+property&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=0&smoothing=1">around
+1990</a>. (<a href="/graphics/seductivemirage.png">Local image
copy</a>)
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The term carries a bias that is not hard to see: it suggests thinking
+about copyright, patents and trademarks by analogy with property
+rights for physical objects. (This analogy is at odds with the legal
+philosophies of copyright law, of patent law, and of trademark law,
+but only specialists know that.) These laws are in fact not much like
+physical property law, but use of this term leads legislators to
+change them to be more so. Since that is the change desired by the
+companies that exercise copyright, patent and trademark powers, the
+bias introduced by the term “intellectual property” suits them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The bias is reason enough to reject the term, and people have often
+asked me to propose some other name for the overall category—or
+have proposed their own alternatives (often humorous). Suggestions
+include IMPs, for Imposed Monopoly Privileges, and GOLEMs, for
+Government-Originated Legally Enforced Monopolies. Some speak of
+“exclusive rights regimes”, but referring to restrictions
+as “rights” is doublethink too.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Some of these alternative names would be an improvement, but it is a
+mistake to replace “intellectual property” with any other
+term. A different name will not address the term's deeper problem:
+overgeneralization. There is no such unified thing as
+“intellectual property”—it is a mirage. The only
+reason people think it makes sense as a coherent category is that
+widespread use of the term has misled them about the laws in question.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The term “intellectual property” is at best a catch-all to
+lump together disparate laws. Nonlawyers who hear one term applied to
+these various laws tend to assume they are based on a common
+principle and function similarly.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Nothing could be further from the case.
+These laws originated separately, evolved differently, cover different
+activities, have different rules, and raise different public policy issues.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+For instance, copyright law was designed to promote authorship and
+art, and covers the details of expression of a work. Patent law was
+intended to promote the publication of useful ideas, at the price of
+giving the one who publishes an idea a temporary monopoly over
+it—a price that may be worth paying in some fields and not in
+others.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Trademark law, by contrast, was not intended to promote any particular
+way of acting, but simply to enable buyers to know what they are
+buying. Legislators under the influence of the term “intellectual
+property”, however, have turned it into a scheme that provides
+incentives for advertising. And these are just
+three out of many laws that the term refers to.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Since these laws developed independently, they are different in every
+detail, as well as in their basic purposes and methods. Thus, if you
+learn some fact about copyright law, you'd be wise to assume that
+patent law is different. You'll rarely go wrong!
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In practice, nearly all general statements you encounter that are
+formulated using “intellectual property” will be false.
+For instance, you'll see claims that “its” purpose is to
+“promote innovation”, but that only fits patent law and
+perhaps plant variety monopolies. Copyright law is not concerned with
+innovation; a pop song or novel is copyrighted even if there is
+nothing innovative about it. Trademark law is not concerned with
+innovation; if I start a tea store and call it “rms tea”,
+that would be a solid trademark even if I sell the same teas in the
+same way as everyone else. Trade secret law is not concerned with
+innovation, except tangentially; my list of tea customers would be a
+trade secret with nothing to do with innovation.</p>
+
+<p>
+You will also see assertions that “intellectual property”
+is concerned with “creativity”, but really that only fits
+copyright law. More than creativity is needed to make a patentable
+invention. Trademark law and trade secret law have nothing to do with
+creativity; the name “rms tea” isn't creative at all, and
+neither is my secret list of tea customers.</p>
+
+<p>
+People often say “intellectual property” when they really
+mean some larger or smaller set of laws. For instance, rich countries
+often impose unjust laws on poor countries to squeeze money out of
+them. Some of these laws are among those called “intellectual
+property” laws, and others are not; nonetheless, critics of the
+practice often grab for that label because it has become familiar to
+them. By using it, they misrepresent the nature of the issue. It
+would be better to use an accurate term, such as “legislative
+colonization”, that gets to the heart of the matter.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Laymen are not alone in being confused by this term. Even law
+professors who teach these laws are lured and distracted by the
+seductiveness of the term “intellectual property”, and
+make general statements that conflict with facts they know. For
+example, one professor wrote in 2006:
+</p>
+
+<blockquote><p>
+Unlike their descendants who now work the floor at WIPO, the framers
+of the US constitution had a principled, procompetitive attitude to
+intellectual property. They knew rights might be necessary,
+but…they tied congress's hands, restricting its power in
+multiple ways.
+</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>
+That statement refers to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of the US
+Constitution, which authorizes copyright law and patent law. That
+clause, though, has nothing to do with trademark law, trade secret
+law, or various others. The term “intellectual property”
+led that professor to make a false generalization.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The term “intellectual property” also leads to simplistic
+thinking. It leads people to focus on the meager commonality in form
+that these disparate laws have—that they create artificial
+privileges for certain parties—and to disregard the details
+which form their substance: the specific restrictions each law places
+on the public, and the consequences that result. This simplistic focus
+on the form encourages an “economistic” approach to all
+these issues.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Economics operates here, as it often does, as a vehicle for unexamined
+assumptions. These include assumptions about values, such as that
+amount of production matters while freedom and way of life do not,
+and factual assumptions which are mostly false, such as that
+copyrights on music supports musicians, or that patents on drugs
+support life-saving research.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Another problem is that, at the broad scale implicit in the term
“intellectual
+property”, the specific issues raised by the various laws become
+nearly invisible. These issues arise from the specifics of each
+law—precisely what the term “intellectual property”
+encourages people to ignore. For instance, one issue relating to
+copyright law is whether music sharing should be allowed; patent law
+has nothing to do with this. Patent law raises issues such as whether
+poor countries should be allowed to produce life-saving drugs and sell
+them cheaply to save lives; copyright law has nothing to do with such
+matters.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Neither of these issues is solely economic in nature, and their
+noneconomic aspects are very different; using the shallow economic
+overgeneralization as the basis for considering them means ignoring the
+differences. Putting the two laws in the “intellectual
+property” pot obstructs clear thinking about each one.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Thus, any opinions about “the issue of intellectual
+property” and any generalizations about this supposed category
+are almost surely foolish. If you think all those laws are one issue,
+you will tend to choose your opinions from a selection of sweeping
+overgeneralizations, none of which is any good.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+If you want to think clearly about the issues raised by patents, or
+copyrights, or trademarks, or various other different laws, the first
+step is to
+forget the idea of lumping them together, and treat them as separate
+topics. The second step is to reject the narrow perspectives and
+simplistic picture the term “intellectual property”
+suggests. Consider each of these issues separately, in its fullness,
+and you have a chance of considering them well.
+</p>
+
+<p>And when it comes to reforming WIPO, here is <a
+href="http://fsfe.org/projects/wipo/wiwo.en.html">one proposal for
+changing the name and substance of WIPO</a>.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+See also <a href="/philosophy/komongistan.html">The Curious History of
+Komongistan (Busting the term “intellectual property”)</a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Countries in Africa are a lot more similar than these laws, and
+“Africa” is a coherent geographical concept; nonetheless,
+<a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/24/africa-clinton">
+talking about “Africa” instead of a specific country
+causes lots of confusion</a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<a
href="http://torrentfreak.com/language-matters-framing-the-copyright-monopoly-so-we-can-keep-our-liberties-130714/">
+Rickard Falkvinge supports rejection of this term</a>.</p>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p><a
+href="http://www.locusmag.com/Perspectives/2016/11/cory-doctorow-sole-and-despotic-dominion/">
+Cory Doctorow also condemns</a> the term “intellectual
+property.”</p></em></ins></span>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+<div class="unprintable">
+
+<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
+to <a
href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.</p>
+
+<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
+ replace it with the translation of these two:
+
+ We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
+ translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
+ Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
+ to <a href="mailto:address@hidden">
+ <address@hidden></a>.</p>
+
+ <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of
+ our web pages, see <a
+ href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+ README</a>. -->
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this article.</p>
+</div>
+
+<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
+ files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
+ be under CC BY-ND <span class="removed"><del><strong>3.0
US.</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>4.0.</em></ins></span> Please do NOT change or
remove this
+ without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+ Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+ document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+ document was modified, or published.
+
+ If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+ Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+ years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+ year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+ being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+
+ There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+ Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+
+<p>Copyright © 2004, 2006, 2010, 2013, <span
class="removed"><del><strong>2015</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>2015, 2016</em></ins></span> Richard M.
Stallman</p>
+
+<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+<span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/">Creative</strong></del></span>
+<span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative</em></ins></span>
+Commons <span class="removed"><del><strong>Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United
States</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0
International</em></ins></span> License</a>.</p>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p class="unprintable">Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2017/01/08 08:59:28 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
| [Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- www/philosophy not-ipr.ar.html not-ipr.el.html ...,
GNUN <=