It strikes me as odd to think about information as private property.
To my understanding, the word "private" is related to the word "deprive".
I think it makes sense to talk about owning something when you are talking
about a limited resource, such as food, machines, land, etc.
Because information isn't a limited resource, it's availability doesn't
decrease when you copy ones and zeros. In other words, you do not deprive
anyone of some information when you copy it.
I think that the whole Intellectual Property industry is one of the most
highly harmful and unethical institutions that our society has deviced; and
which, just like the state, inexplicably is given legitimacy by quite a big
number of people.

Diego
On Sep 8, 2015 4:32 PM, "Pablo" <pablovidal85@???> wrote:

Information is free as in freedom, not as in beer, I thought that was
obvious. Of course I talk about intellectual property, you said your
messages are your property therefore nobody can collect them without your
permission, while I claim that you cannot have intellectual property and
communications privacy properly done at the same time, one of them must be
waived for the other to be fully achieved.

2015-09-08 22:37 GMT+02:00 Otto Meier <ottomeier95@???>:

>
> Is information free? Not for Mr. X who had to pay to install all this
> little nice machines he bought, employ people that run those, … Indeed Mr.X
> could have saved himself a lot of trouble and money. (He could have saved
> that and reduced the prices for his products/services or taxes and fewer
> people would complain resp. invest their time and money in projects to send
> bad video copies around, but …)
>
> Anyway, you are speaking always of intellectual property (intangible property
> that is the result of creativity,such as patents, copyrights, etc.) but I
> speak of privacy (a state in which one is not observed or disturbed by
> other people). When A and B have a chat about lives trivialities they do
> not like to be observed. Where is the intellectual property here,
> the “Happy B’day” message?
>
> If A and B exchange intellectual property of C, like a video, while they
> have a chat, sorry for C, its private.
>
> Hope that clears a little the air.
>
>
>
> On 08.09.2015, at 21:33, Pablo <pablovidal85@???> wrote:
>
> Better than that, there never was a battle for Mr X. and the intellectual
> property rights supporters to win, information will always leak from its
> container, it is free and it will always be. It doesn't really cares about
> what you think about that.
>
> 2015-09-08 21:18 GMT+02:00 Otto Meier <ottomeier95@???>:
>
>>
>> Mr. X will find that A & B do not like what he does and sooner or later
>> he realizes that he does not understand all what A and B exchanging despite
>> all his money … Its not a battle that finishes after the enemy is killed
>> its competition where ever new improvements are found to protect A's and
>> B's interests.
>>
>>
>> On 08.09.2015, at 20:45, Pablo <pablovidal85@???> wrote:
>>
>> And Illegal in the way that Mr. X do not consent A to send the latest
>> hollywood movie to B over the channel, so I guess Mr. X, who has a lot of
>> money to spend on lawyers and politicians, will win the battle anyway.
>>
>> 2015-09-08 14:56 GMT+02:00 Otto Meier <ottomeier95@???>:
>>
>>>
>>> Illegal in the way that A and/or B do not consent that a Mr. X is
>>> listening when A has a chat with B and use the obtained information to
>>> create a claim.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 08.09.2015, at 14:15, Pablo <pablovidal85@???> wrote:
>>>
>>> Exactly, you cannot be sure, and given how easy it is to share bits
>>> you'll have to assume that likely there is some sharing going on. Not sure
>>> what do mean with "illegal way", content providers and ISPs have been
>>> teaming up to inspect internet packets since the technology is available in
>>> most developed countries. Obviously not everybody can in practice do it, it
>>> takes infrastructure and the right amount of money in the pockets of
>>> politicians.
>>>
>>> 2015-09-08 8:30 GMT+02:00 Otto Meier <ottomeier95@???>:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> One can not be sure (nobody shares) but within a contract you could
>>>> define a remedy for the harm that is done to you by not fulfilling the
>>>> contract.
>>>>
>>>> You mean obtaining in an illegal way (without consent) Information (in
>>>> some jurisdictions) should be accepted as a proper proof?! Ok, then I go to
>>>> court and claim $ 1 Mio. damage from A because B told C that A stole it.
>>>> What will a judge say/decide?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 07.09.2015, at 22:56, Pablo <pablovidal85@???> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately eavesdropping is the only way to enforce intellectual
>>>> property rights, how else will you protect your property from being shared
>>>> without your consent? And I mean in practice, because what will you do in a
>>>> court if you have no proof that your property was shared?
>>>>
>>>> 2015-09-07 20:14 GMT+02:00 Otto Meier <ottomeier95@???>:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Mr. X listening to a private communication in which intellectual
>>>>> property (“Happy B’day”) is exchanged is not enforcing intellectual
>>>>> property rights, that’s eavesdropping (secretly listen to a
>>>>> conversation), a violation of my privacy, depending on where you
>>>>> live. Going to court is (peacefully) enforcing your rights e.g. on
>>>>> intellectual property with all its difficulties.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 07.09.2015, at 18:38, Pablo <pablovidal85@???> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Call it whatever you are more confortable with, but if you cannot
>>>>> deprive anybody from it, is not your private property. It may be your
>>>>> shared property with the receiver, until the receiver shares it with
>>>>> somebody else. Mr X listening to communications is something I would expect
>>>>> in a state where intellectual property rights exist, you know, contractual
>>>>> obligations have to be enforced.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2015-09-07 16:27 GMT+02:00 Otto Meier <ottomeier95@???>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Beg to differ.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If A says to B “Happy Birthday”. What B does with it later on, e.g.
>>>>>> telling C, hey A called and said “H.. …” is his thing. Mr. X listening,
>>>>>> before B talks, doesn’t deserve respect.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What happens if A says to B “Happy Birthday but don’t tell anyone”? B
>>>>>> might or not talk. Mr. X listening, before B talks, doesn’t deserve respect.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or, if A contacts B and asks “I would like to share some Info with
>>>>>> you but only when you do not share it with anyone else, do you agree?”. B
>>>>>> agrees. Mr. X listening all the way doesn’t deserve respect.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If one puts communication/information in a contractual context
>>>>>> information stays private property without massive surveillance systems,
>>>>>> its a kind of non disclosure agreement. Of course if you don’t trust B
>>>>>> serving the contract you get paranoid and become Mr. X listening to all and
>>>>>> everything.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The very definition of communication goes against the concept of
>>>>>> private property, once you share the information you lost the capacity of
>>>>>> depriving the rest of the world of it. What strong encryption provides is
>>>>>> just secured communication channels and that's about it. I find people who
>>>>>> supports intellectual property and privacy rights at the same time amusing,
>>>>>> because you know, the only way we have to enforce property rights on
>>>>>> information is precisely having full control of it, using massive
>>>>>> surveillance systems.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2015-09-07 8:44 GMT+02:00 Otto Meier <ottomeier95@???>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why: What I say to someone else is my property I decide with whom to
>>>>>>> share it. Its my decision. Its a principle. It doesn’t matter what it is, a
>>>>>>> subversive comment or a Happy Birthday note. I do not want anyone else to
>>>>>>> read it! Whoever doesn’t respect that doesn’t deserve my respect...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "communications being intercepted and who we speak to known to
>>>>>>> people we would like to conceal this from is that once we have The Perfect
>>>>>>> end-to-end encrypted, decentralised, distributed, privacy preserving
>>>>>>> communication tool that everybody in the world uses, we actually don’t have
>>>>>>> anything meaningful to say over it."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dude, there has been a constant in history which is that most people
>>>>>>> don't have anything meaningful to say in any medium. Let the general
>>>>>>> populace cannibalize themselves, that's their choice, but those who are
>>>>>>> actually alive need a way to communicate without prosecution. Stop worrying
>>>>>>> about everyone else and focus on the things that you as an individual find
>>>>>>> important. Similar individuals who share a vision will be drawn together.
>>>>>>> It's never been about saving the world and it never will be.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What one finds worthless might for someone else something...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sep 6, 2015 3:21 PM, "Arturo Filastò" <arturo@???> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I apologise in advance if what I talk about may appear to be a
>>>>>>>> little be off topic, but by reading this thread and in particular the words
>>>>>>>> of Jaromil and Amir I believe this is fertile ground in which to express
>>>>>>>> some of my ideas.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The more time goes by the more disillusioned I become about some
>>>>>>>> aspects of these so called “movements” close to the
>>>>>>>> anarcho-libertarian-crypto-paranoia sub-system.
>>>>>>>> What actually worries me much more than all of our communications
>>>>>>>> being intercepted and who we speak to known to people we would like to
>>>>>>>> conceal this from is that once we have The Perfect end-to-end encrypted,
>>>>>>>> decentralised, distributed, privacy preserving communication tool that
>>>>>>>> everybody in the world uses, we actually don’t have anything meaningful to
>>>>>>>> say over it.
>>>>>>>> What use is crypto and these tools to us if we don’t have an idea
>>>>>>>> or a plan as to what we should do with it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I see this brainwashing being particularly prevalent in the Berlin
>>>>>>>> scene and it makes me sick and that is one of the reasons why some years
>>>>>>>> ago I fled the city promising to never live here again.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The other aspect is that I sometimes have some serious problems
>>>>>>>> understanding what are the motivations and the ideals underpinning the
>>>>>>>> behaviours of certain people in this realm and have been stung by this in
>>>>>>>> the past. Said differently it doesn’t mean that if two people are
>>>>>>>> interested in doing the same thing, they are both doing it for the same
>>>>>>>> reason. The reason, in my opinion, is actually the most important thing and
>>>>>>>> agree on what to do is just not enough, we should also agree on WHY we do
>>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This lack of vision and common shared objective makes me often
>>>>>>>> doubt if I should continue focussing on what it is I am focussing on and if
>>>>>>>> I should instead move to tackle other more important and relevant problems.
>>>>>>>> The times I have stopped a moment to look around and listen to what
>>>>>>>> the earth is telling us I realise that surveillance and technological
>>>>>>>> control is only just a small piece of this puzzle. If we continue in what
>>>>>>>> we are doing, in not too long we will completely fuck ourselves. We have
>>>>>>>> actually already fucked ourselves, the club of Rome warned us of this
>>>>>>>> already in 1972, but nobody listened to their warning that if nothing were
>>>>>>>> to be done there would not be any turning back. We are now too late. We are
>>>>>>>> fucked. All we can do is extend our the lifetime of humanity, but what has
>>>>>>>> been done is the last century is now IRREVERSIBLE.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Going back to the main topic in question I have a hard time
>>>>>>>> understanding why certain people are doing what they do. To make an example
>>>>>>>> I don’t understand why Cody Wilson is so much into this idea of making
>>>>>>>> guns. What is the vision there? What is the end goal?
>>>>>>>> Is it really necessary to fuck up a beautiful technology such as 3d
>>>>>>>> printing to make a political statement? In a way it’s as if somebody were
>>>>>>>> to publish schemes on how to use enzymes to build a bioweapon, hence
>>>>>>>> realising the threat that people proposing more regulation on biohacking
>>>>>>>> are using to justify it.
>>>>>>>> Groups in the past have overthrown their own government without the
>>>>>>>> need of 3d printed guns and let’s be frank you are not going to supply an
>>>>>>>> army with plastic guns and expect them to have a chance against the US
>>>>>>>> government. I’m sorry, but I just don’t buy it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Again I am sorry if this is a long off-topic rant, but I wanted to
>>>>>>>> get these things off my chest and I hope that somebody here can in some way
>>>>>>>> relate to it. Some of the people I have spoken to about ideas have not
>>>>>>>> given the importance I believe this problem deserves and I believe this is
>>>>>>>> caused by the anarcho-libertarian-crypto-paranoia sect brainwashing that I
>>>>>>>> see going on all around me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ~ Arturo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>>>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>
>

_______________________________________________
unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem