Home » Uncategorized » IP revisited

IP revisited

yes, actually, IP DOES matter. we are not just talking about how cultures naturally exchange ideas when they interact with each other, how certain things (like symbols and geometric shapes) can’t be ‘copyrighted’ because they are so commonplace, how knowledge should be free instead of corporations laying claim to it so you have to pay, or how sometimes more than one person can come up with discovery or invention at the same time. it is about the deliberate historical revisionism that occurs when men take credit for women’s work, discoveries and inventions. that is harmful in itself by presenting very biased and inaccurate stories and gender stereotypes that uphold the very myths we believe in today.

simply put, IP should not matter when it comes to corporations and institutions (such as churches) that have successfully navigated their way through the legal system by claiming the same rights as people. those same entities hold monopolies and limit the distribution of knowledge, even the funding of thorough research into historical studies that would go against their agenda or propaganda.

creative work is derivative: http://archive.mises.org/11674/ and http://questioncopyright.org/minute_memes/all_creative_work_is_derivative

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “IP revisited

  1. What? I find the idea of people making money off of creativity which is/would be a hobby for most people to be questionable. Copyright protections and patents seem to be like ‘called it’ more than protecting someone’s rights. It’s the fear that someone will come along and create the same thing without even knowing you’d done it before and you’ll lose credit for it. I’m skeptical of at least the modern/liberal concept of uniqueness and individuality. It’s hard to imagine we’re all not full of basically the same sort of ideas and vision. I wish there were more discussions about this, ones that ignored the current economic/social systems and all the money involved and focused on the nature of creativity more objectively.

    • keeping in mind i wrote this last year, my thoughts have gotten more articulate since then:

      men typically steal women’s work. they did it when women didn’t have any rights (including getting their writings published under their own, female names) and they still do it, which is why there is a lack of female authors, etc. in many fields and so many brilliant female minds go unnoticed, because people’s attention is diverted to males who are seen as ‘naturally’ superior. if a woman makes a man an enemy when formerly he was complimenting her intelligence or creativity, he will use his power to take credit for what she has done. the ‘feminine muse’ bait is particularly insidious in pagan and other religious circles. this also happens in arguments where the opposing side steals the points from the other and pretends they came up with them.

      secular and libertarian men who pretend to argue against the concept of intellectual property (IP) while promoting their own copyrights (usually so they can make a profit off what others have either given for free or did not make a profit from, because hello, nobody wanted to promote them) are in the same bunch. apparently, it’s only stealing when corporations/groups and not (’poor downtrodden and unable to make a name for themselves’) individual males do it, because they want that same power. brown-nosing, having lawyers and wealth go a long way as well.

      as for the hobby part, well…try telling that to artists, writers, knitters and others who want to make a living – much less any money – from what they do best and be independent, because LOL…there are plenty of people who demand they do it for them for free, due to the belief that ‘it’s just a hobby’ or ‘anyone can do it’ and leaving it at that. such an attitude makes sure that people are not rewarded for creativity or originality, and ends up promoting mediocrity and conformity. knitters who knit for pay, for example, can ask for credit over certain patterns – it’s not unreasonable to say that other knitters-for-pay can come up with their own patterns if they don’t want to infringe on that knitter’s business. the field of cooking, as another example, was only ever considered ‘women’s work’ and not profitable (more like a hobby or duty) until men came along and turned it into an industry which they could dominate. even today,’feminized jobs’ (aka ‘pink-collar jobs’) like cooking, nursing, caretaking, medicine, gynecology and teaching which have traditionally been female-dominated and usually entail nurturing skills are taken more seriously when men are doing it – and they get paid more,too.

      in short, the decency of giving credit where credit is due is not the same as the legal concept of IP. the former can overlap with the latter, but not necessarily (or even often) vice-versa.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s