[H-GEN] Fwd: [research] Request for expert witness

[Peter McConnell]

On 04/06/07 19:14:20, andrew laidlaw wrote:
> 

>> A programmer is employed by a company for a peiod of time to
>> develop something, which was copied from somewhere else. He
>> then leaves and uses the code in direct opposition to his
>> original employer.
>> I would question the ethics of this person.
> 
> 
> 
> A relativistic concern.  Prima facie, I would argue that the first
> responsibility of anyone designing a system is DALAP (Do As Little As
> Possible).  This whole IP nonsense came into our culture only
> recently, during the time of Queen Anne,
I agree, and that stupid concept that all people are equal in the eyes
of the law is even more recent.

>  Until then, it was open
> slather, as - arguably - it should be.

law of the jungle type stuff

> After all, how can anyone
> claim an idea to be their "own" when they've been educated by the
> society, and exposed to the accumulated wealth of its knowledge base?
They have paid to be exposed to the accumulated wealth of its knowledge  
base. Through tertiary fees and HECS.

> If this was an LUG in China, Taiwan, India or Brazil, I doubt any
> correspondent would have had such qualms - so the concern is relative
> both to our own time and to our own location.
> 
That my have been true in the recent past, but as these countries now
trade with the USA they find they have to conform to US style copy-
right and patent laws. An example of which would be Brazil and  
Pharmaceutical patents.
> 

> law, and that frequently coincides with what might also be held to
> constitute ethical behaviour, but - as any lawyer knows - they are  
> not the same thing.
I raised the point that it seemed to be a question of ethics.


> I'd have thought it was a part and parcel implication of an "open"
> community that one would try to avoid providing currency to such a
> trap.
Before copyright and patent laws existed, your ideas would be exploited
by the rich and you would not receive one cent. Copyright and patent
laws leveled the playing field and over time contributed to a more
free and equal society.

Whether it is appropriate to give a patent for an algorithm, a plant or
the human genome are issues that society now has to deal with.

In fact you talk the implications of being part of an "open" community
based on the beliefs of Richard Stallman at http://gnu.org
or those of   http://www.opensource.org/ which I believe was supported  
by Linus Torvalds.

Quoting a paragraph from http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-529230.html

"However, Torvalds' intentions notwithstanding, this book is likely to  
inflame old arguments about microkernels vs. monolithic kernels, the  
concept of whether Linux should really be called GNU/Linux and the  
issue of open-source software vs. free software. It will also help fuel  
the debate over intellectual property, to which Torvalds devotes the  
closing chapters. This is no bad thing; if Torvalds' book helps explain  
the issues surrounding open source and intellectual property to a wider  
audience, it will be a success."

I suspect that your political beliefs and my own are worlds apart.


regards

Peter