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

[andrew laidlaw]

Peter McConnell <mcconnell at southernphone.com.au> wrote: 
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.
.......

> 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.

omigod.  So, the role of the Law should be to preserve the status quo, eh?

> 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.
> 

ditto. Are you really meaning to argue that might is right? You must be on my side, after all.

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


I hope so, however it is not my intention to win the argument, merely to point out its existence.  You will understand that your response was broadly as predicted?  (Except for:  "that stupid concept that all people are equal in the eyes of the law is even more recent." - an off-topic argument from the particular to the general, which also happens to be false at least to the extent that the CONCEPT of equality before the law is actually ancient).

I just thought it was unfortunate for someone who was asking for inputs relative to a strictly legal / technical question to get a response that muddies the water by focussing on (well-worn) ethical questions that were in fact absent.  

However, once the water was muddied, it seemed only fair to have it be balanced mud.

regards.... andrew.






       
---------------------------------
How would you spend $50,000 to create a more sustainable environment in Australia?  Go to Yahoo!7 Answers and share your idea.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.humbug.org.au/pipermail/general/attachments/20070605/2f7cef94/attachment.html>