From: jamiller@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Piracy and Privacy issues in Computers.  WAS RE: Privacy
Date: 23 Nov 92 14:41:31 CST
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

> Don't delude yourself by clouding the issue or adding extraneous details 
> which tend to incriminate.  And note, not everyone agrees entirely with 
> the 'intellectual property' concept.  I certainly have some profound 
> reservations with it...

I concur.  Again the distinctions between protections accrued under
"trade secrets," "patents," and "copywrite" law are fairly
straigtforward and need not be clouded either.  As I recal from an
ethics class of a couple semesters ago they go something like this:

Proving trade secret violations are very difficult and involve showing
that a party obtained a "secret" despite addequate security.  The
"secret" must be near identical to the infringing parties product.
The infringing party must be shown to have produced their product with
knowledge of the "secret" or directly copying the "secret."

Patents may be obtained on applications of ideas and not ideas.
Patents may be obtained for certain chemical processes and other
physical appliactions of principles but principles are categorized as
"ideas."  Patents expire in a number of years (I don't remember
exactly how long now.  I think 30 years or some portion of a persons'
lifetime.)

Copywrites are not trade secrets and are not patented (exclusion of
the middle, oops:).  'Intellectual property' issues enter here and as
noted are not universally accepted.  Copywrites are not time bound.

The legal strengths and weaknesses of each of these protections (or
restrictions depending on how you view them) are founded in ethical
theories of Utilitarianism and Social Contract theory a la' J.S. Mill,
Locke, Rouseau, Hume, and Kant.  I've read Stallman's "Gnu Manefesto"
and "Ethics in Computer Technology" (can't remember the author of
hand) and found them both very informative.

I think more than piracy which is still just an issue of whether Big
Corporations get $4mil profit a year instead of $6mil, issues of
privacy (not piracy) in computers is more significant.

To think that every word we write or read is tracked by "Big Brother"
that databases containing my phone records, what kind of purchases I
make, as well as any other tidbit of information about me is available
to just about anyone.  Not to mention, 4'th Amendment rights go out
the tube when in comes to computers.

Take the example of Steve Jackson who had a Role-playing Game company
where an ex-member of the AT&T 911 hit squad was working.  The SS
(that's secret service not gestapo, at least for now) broke into his
office confiscated ALL their computers and arrested them because they
were "looking for stolen software."  As it turns out thanks to the
EFF(electronic freedom foundation) maybe things will turn out right
but this is not the only example where factions of the government have
used technology as a excuse not only to gain undue control over the
citizenry but also control their access to it, ie. Tv, radio, shortwave
access is strictly controlled by government to the detrement of the
citizenry.

that's probably more than my $.02 worth...

>> 						Ben Weber
>> --------------------------------
>> Not speaking for AT&T
>> --------------------------------
-- 
jamiller@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
James Miller

_chicchai .sig no ho ga ichiban iin janai ka..._
             Enlightenment Happens?
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc