I Need A Good Graphic Artist To Make Art For Phatmass Merchandise

[r2Dtoo]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1350764472' post='2495425']
Ending a sentence with a preposition is not necessarily ungrammatical.
[/quote]
You would know that. I just report any activity that the Board of Grammar Authorities of Bohemian Grove tells me to report. I am but a mere peon in this conspiracy.

Edited October 20, 2012 by r2Dtoo

[MIKolbe]

you're so vain

[r2Dtoo]

Peons always are.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1350764985' post='2495432']
you're so vain
[/quote]
You probably think this post is about you.

[r2Dtoo]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1350765161' post='2495436']
You probably think this post is about you.
[/quote]
Obviously.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1350751693' post='2495330']
The concept of trespass is not dependent upon IP.
[/quote]

Yes, I’m afraid it would be, in regards to IP. The concept of trespass implies that someone is on someone else’s property uninvited. How does one trespass on property that does not exist? If one cannot own an idea one cannot trespass on an idea.

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1350757177' post='2495356']
So you feel that hacking is not a form of trespass? If someone enters my private files by hacking, this is not trespass? [/quote]

Not if I accept your extreme ideology. Hard-mod hacking could be trespassing, but soft-mod? No. Soft-mod hacking can exist only in the virtual world, the IP world. One never need touch or modify anything that would be physical or actual property to make a copy of the would-be intellectual properties.

While one cannot break into a property that does not exist lets look at it a different way. Say we are neighbors, your wifi broadcast falls onto my property, your cell phone conversions pass through my property. The two signals are encrypted or locked, sure, but they still fall onto my property. If you don’t have any rights over or own those intellectual broadcasts I can unlock them with my property and make copies of those signals with my property. To rationalize such theft, it would be like if a locked safe that belonged to you found its way onto my property. I have every right to open it since it is on my property. Since any information I find in the safe doesn’t belong to you, I can share it all with whomever I wish.

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1350757177' post='2495356']Information you put in front of my eyes is no more private than the color of your shirt. You want it private, you keep it private.
[/quote]

Again let’s take your rationalization for theft and use it, quite easily, as a rationalization for invading your privacy. From my property I can see your house, with my property and again from my own property, and with the marvels of technology I can make photographic copies of every room and every person inside the house. Nothing has been taken from you, I’ve never set foot on your property to trespass, I didn’t steal the originals or anything physical, I’ve only made an intellectual photographic copy of you, your family, and your house. Now I wish to take this photographic information and share it with others. What can you really do about it? Nothing, really, if you cannot claim rights over the images. Which you wouldn’t have because you cannot own an idea.

The idea that one cannot own an idea is very scary to me because it allows intellectual theft, and intellectual invasion of privacy so easily. It is not out of the realm of possibility that a computer will someday soon be able to make copies of our thoughts (ideas). If one cannot own an idea how can anyone claim privacy over an idea? By claiming some idea is private is to claim rights over that idea or ownership over it. I don’t see how someone can claim some information is private when they do not and cannot own information.


[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1350760330' post='2495370']
Trespass is the actual violation. That's a good question, though. Would the copied property carry that stain of theft, since it was never supposed to be released? Knowing information was illegally obtained, it seems it would be immoral in some way to make use of it, if you knew how it was obtained.[/quote]

This is very close to the problem I have with your thinking. It smells wrong. Stinks to high heaven.

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1350760330' post='2495370']But the fact is, you never owned the idea. You had an idea. Anyone could have had that idea. Someone else might have had that idea. You owned the property where you recorded the idea.

What if you had a ring in a safe, and someone broke in and used a device that copied the ring. Your ring remained in its entirety. You can still wear it, it looks and functions exactly the same. Of course, if you wanted to sell it, you would likely find fewer buyers.

The trespasser/copier, would clearly owe all his profits from sales to you.But would you be able to command those who purchased the copies to return their copies (obviously in exchange for the return of the amount of money they exchanged)? I would say no. You didn't own the arrangement of the materials, which is all the copies are. It seems to me justice would demand the trespasser not enjoy profit from his trespass.

Suppose you build a gate in a certain way. A neighbor passes by, sees the design, and goes and uses the same design. Is that theft? If it's possible to own an idea, then which ideas?

Information kept on my property out of the view of others is clearly private. It's not the information itself, but its location. You have no right to enter my private property without permission.
[/quote]

Intellectual private property privacy does not exist without IP. Any information that can be copied without physically touching or modify physical property is not an invasion of privacy. It is only copying information that no one can own or have the right to keep private.

I don’t have anymore time today. I wish I did. But with what accounts as two full time jobs, creating IP of all things, I simply don’t have time. It will likely be a number of days before I am able to even read any responses that are more than a glance. Phatmass and the interwebs in general is a huge distraction. The only time I even get on any more is at “real” work, and that’s no more than a few moments. Or on my phone to make short replies and glance at the insanity. At home I’ve just blocked PM, FB, and other non-sense sites so I do not waste time that I must devote to my freelance work. I have a duty I would like to serve, but to do so I must first be out of debt. Working my but off is the way to solve the problem.

Anyway I will at some point see your replies and try to respond as soon as I can. Back to work… @@

Edited October 22, 2012 by KnightofChrist

[Winchester]

We can disregard this one.

Edited October 23, 2012 by Winchester

[Winchester]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1350946721' post='2496058']

Again let’s take your rationalization for theft
[/quote]
And that is where I stop reading. When you deal with my statements regarding the nature of property, we will move on. If you can't keep yourself from impugning my integrity, then we're done.