The Nature of Copyright
Institutionalised Censorship
by Abdun Nur
|
“I met a man with a dollar. We exchanged dollars
and we still both had a dollar.
I met a man with an idea, we both exchanged ideas
and now we both have two ideas.”
“The genuine history of
mankind is the history of ideas. It is ideas that distinguish man from all
other beings. Ideas engender social institutions, political changes,
technological methods of production, and all that is called economic conditions.”
-
Ludwig Von
Mises
The legal
fiction of Copyright is an extension of the fraud of ownership, being the control and monopoly of intellectual
‘property’, used to extort revenue (taxation) upon the application or copying
of the idea or design of the copyright holder, further imposing regulations
upon another who uses the copyrighted goods, services or ideas, so dictating
what someone can or cannot do with their own real resource to possess and use
that resource.
These two
types of possession - tangible possession and intangible possession - are
mutually inconsistent; if you trade your labours in natural equity you give
full and complete possession over to the buyer, but in the fictional world of
copyright, you sell your goods and services yet claim you still retain them
in full, and wish to be paid by everyone who uses the same idea by holding a
state-granted criminal monopoly privilege (ie privilege means a right to
steal).
“The monopolies now
understood as copyrights and patents were originally created by royal decree,
bestowed as a form of favouritism and control. As the power of the monarchy
dwindled, these chartered monopolies were reformed, and essentially by
default, they wound up in the hands of authors and inventors.”
-
Eric E.
Johnson
Copyright
has never been of net benefit to society and instead serves to enrich a few
at the expense of creativity. Copyright is invalid because only your labour
generates wealth - if you have physical resources they are free, only the
labour invested within those resources has value, while intellectual property
is not scarce and is itself a resource, as knowledge builds upon knowledge. Therefore to claim monopoly upon the advancement of any knowledge or ideas
that themselves are an extension of existing un-monopolised ideas is
inequitable, and is a selectively applied legal fiction created by the state,
applied only to limited and specified monopolies.
Copying
never deprives the alleged victim of the original item, and so enforcement of
copyright law constitutes aggression on the part of the state to impose
monopoly and privilege.
In reality
intellectual property is something you can trade, but not something you can
rent out. In the case of copyright they demand rent on something they have
sold, but we can only own what we ourselves create and therefore all forms
of rental are definitely usurious, since it is equivalent to selling your
resource, then still demanding it is your own. Selling anything is transferring
in entirety a justification of use; in doing so you concede all fictional
rights, and possession upon it. Two parties cannot possess one thing, each,
in entirety, that constitutes a fictional relation of entanglement that
cannot exist naturally.
It is claimed
'what is to stop someone else then taking my invention, story, song or
discovery and claiming it as their creation'?
Being the
originator of an idea does afford you advantages, for example if you write a
book, and I copy your book but claim I wrote it myself that is fraud and you
can seek relief. But if I copy your book and leave it unaltered, crediting
you with its creation, I have caused you no harm. An author can claim things a
copier cannot, for example the author can claim the first edition, the original
and authorised version, the author can state clearly that their version
benefits the creator of the work directly, whereas a copier could not, and
those who enjoy the work of an author could seek out a copy that benefited
the author.
The
supporters of copyright monopoly claim the idea of plagiarism can only exist
with copyright, which is utter nonsense. Plagiarism occurs when a writer
duplicates another writer's language or ideas and then calls the work his or
her own. To avoid the charge of plagiarism, some writers take care to credit
those from whom they borrow and quote, but in reality all authors use a
universal pool of existing ideas, they just combine ideas in new ways. Plagiarism in respect of taking credit for a written work that another wrote
is a wrongful act in equity, it needs no corporate policy to make it so - it
is innately. To claim ‘falsely’ anything that is of direct detriment to
another can be disputed and relief established in equity.
Höffner
compared the economic effects copyright law had on authors and publishing in
the United Kingdom to those in Germany in the first part of the nineteenth
century when in Germany such laws had not been instituted, and found that
more books were printed and read in Germany where authors, in general, also
made more money.
“The roots of copyright
literally lie in censorship. It was easy for State and church to control
thought by controlling the scribes, but then the printing press came along,
and the authorities worried that they couldn’t control official thought as
easily. So Queen Mary created the Stationer’s Company in 1557, with the
exclusive franchise over book publishing, to control the press and what
information the people could access. When the charter of the Stationer’s
Company expired, the publishers lobbied for an extension, but in the Statute
of Anne (1710) Parliament gave copyright to authors instead. Authors liked
this because it freed their works from State control. Nowadays they use
copyright much as the State originally did: to censor and ban books.”
-
(N. Stephan
Kinsella)
Electronic
versions of written works cost almost nothing to copy and disseminate. There
are advantages and disadvantages to electronic versions of written works,
meaning the printed version will always have a dominant place, as it is an
easier medium to access and to examine and digest the contents, more
satisfying and interactive in many ways.
Electronic
games and software is, in general grossly overpriced, generating obscene
profits for corporate monopolies. Often the majority of these games or
software programs are poor or low quality, dressed up and promising far more
than they deliver. The true cost of software is pennies, development cost
being small in comparison to the number of copies used. People would be happy
to pay the true cost of pennies, not the corporate cost; even this would
generate more rewards for the actual authors if they were free of
corporation, than they could have ever earned through that fiction, and if
the software was popular the pennies would far exceed earnings for the labour
invested.
The ‘Stars’
of film, television, literature, sport and radio cry in outrage at those who
copy the monopoly of the corporations they represent. These elite Stars have
millions in the bank already, yet their avarice is so insatiable they still
can't stop whoring themselves upon the corporate alter.
‘Patent’ a ‘title’ of privilege copyright
Originally patents were “open
letters” granted by the monarch authorizing someone to do
something, as patent title, of for example a monopoly to sell certain goods in
a certain area, or a land monopoly to homestead land in the New World on
behalf of the Crown, or as monopoly copyright used by the corporations to
prevent new technologies from entering the market to compete with the
existing monopolies they presently enjoy. This retards natural competition and
technological advance, created and maintained through State granted monopoly
as a privilege of the corporations, and prevents those without financial
backing from using their own creations and inventions.
In the case of the US, patents
are administered by a huge federal bureaucracy that grants monopolies on the
production and trade of various things, which means holders may ask the Federal courts to order the use of force to stop competitors. But the
competitors have not done anything that justifies force. They merely have
used information to guide their actions with respect to their own resources.
Russian authorities, with
Microsoft’s approval, used IP law as a “pretext for seizing computers and other
materials from political opponents of the government and news organizations.”(Engadget)
Another example: Alexander Graham Bell who
is credited with inventing the telephone, stole the telephone patent of an
Italian inventor Antonio Meucci claiming it as his own.Although he had a
design it was later proven never to have worked; the true inventor took him
to court but died before the case was completed. In 2002 the House of
Representatives Resolution 269 recognised Antonio Meucci as the true inventor
of the telephone and stated "If Meucci had been able to pay the $10 fee to maintain the caveat
after 1874, no patent could have been issued to Bell"
Bell went on to monopolise the
telephone defending his stolen invention over 800 times in court from those
who used the idea without his consent.
Nature
and copyright
Shortly after the Declaration of
Independence, Congress declared that natural substances, e.g. water or salt, were
God’s gift to mankind and that therefore products of nature should be limited
in their patent protection. While this was a noble declaration, it has
actually been used against those whose rights it would protect. It has forced
private interests to synthetically alter natural substances -- for instance
the burgeoning biotech field of recombinant DNA technology, i.e. genetically
modified organisms (GMOs) -- for the sole reason that it guarantees them
ownership/patent rights.
In fact, a medical system that legally requires it make a profit threatens to destroy and/or incriminate itself if non-patented, non-profitable natural substances or therapies are employed. It also results in so much collateral damage to those it purports to serve that it could rightly be called a modern form of human sacrifice.
The corporations involved in
the movie, software, publishing, and music industries cry out for copyright
protection, the monopoly protection afforded by the ‘legal’ system and the
State Corporations allows the global legalized theft of hundreds of billions annually.
Copyright imposes artificial
scarcity of innovation, invention, and creativity, as all knowledge builds
upon existing knowledge, to monopolise that new knowledge stagnates,
constricts and retards advancement; monopoly always has a stagnating effect, just
as we see with government monopoly itself, or the banking monopoly - it
creates imposition, as it exists against nature, only the threat or use of
force can maintain the artificial scarcity of monopoly.
The corporations claim a loss
of profits from those copying their monopoly copyright; profit is the
monetary surplus added upon the cost of a product or service after accounting
for wages, rent, cost of raw materials, etc., so corporate profit is added
onto the actual cost of the created product or service to the end consumer,
an invented amount, identical to the taxation added by the imposed State
corporation that itself grants the monopoly through copyright protection.
|
From Servant of the Light @ http://servantofthelight.com/content/view/239/294/
For more information about copyrort see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/copyright
For more by Abdun Nur on this see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/abdun%20nur
- Scroll down through ‘Older Posts’ at the end of each section
Hope you like this
not for profit site -
It takes hours of work every day
to maintain, write, edit, research, illustrate and publish this website from a
tiny cabin in a remote forest
Like what we do? Please give enough
for a meal or drink if you can -
Donate any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!
Please click below -
For further enlightening
information enter a word or phrase into the random synchronistic search box @ http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com
And see
New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com
New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati
New Illuminati Youtube Channel - http://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/feed
New Illuminati on Google+ @ https://plus.google.com/115562482213600937809/posts
New Illuminati on Twitter @ www.twitter.com/new_illuminati
New Illuminations –Art(icles) by
R. Ayana @ http://newilluminations.blogspot.com
The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com
The Prince of Centraxis - http://centraxis.blogspot.com (Be Aware! This link leads to implicate & xplicit
concepts & images!)
DISGRUNTLED SITE ADMINS PLEASE NOTE –
We provide a live link to your original material on your site (and
links via social networking services) - which raises your ranking on search
engines and helps spread your info further! This site is
published under Creative Commons Fair Use Copyright (unless an individual
article or other item is declared otherwise by the copyright holder) –
reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you
give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably
active) link to the original (along with this or a similar notice).
Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or
mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web –
but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a donation (no
amount is too small or too large) or leave a comment – and thanks for reading
this far…
Live long and prosper! Together we can create the best of all possible
worlds…
From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com
