Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S267687AbTACWJs>; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 17:09:48 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S267690AbTACWJs>; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 17:09:48 -0500
Received: from 5-116.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br ([200.193.163.116]:64492 "EHLO
	5-116.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id <S267687AbTACWJr>; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 17:09:47 -0500
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 20:17:52 -0200 (BRST)
From: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>
X-X-Sender: riel@imladris.surriel.com
To: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
cc: lm@bitmover.com, "" <mark@mark.mielke.cc>, "" <billh@gnuppy.monkey.org>,
       "" <paul@clubi.ie>, "" <Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net>,
       "" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?
In-Reply-To: <E18UYT2-0004xV-00@fencepost.gnu.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.50L.0301032014120.2429-100000@imladris.surriel.com>
References: <20030102013736.GA2708@gnuppy.monkey.org>
 <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301020245080.8691-100000@fogarty.jakma.org>
 <20030102055859.GA3991@gnuppy.monkey.org> <20030102061430.GA23276@mark.mielke.cc>
 <E18UIZS-0006Cr-00@fencepost.gnu.org> <20030103040612.GA10651@work.bitmover.com>
 <E18UYT2-0004xV-00@fencepost.gnu.org>
X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org
X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1605
Lines: 39

On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, Richard Stallman wrote:

> The term "intellectual property" lumps together copyrights, patents,
> trademarks and other more obscure areas of law, all of which are
> totally different.  (See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html.)
> Its main use is to obfuscate the difference between these areas and
> discourage careful clear thinking.

How about expanding the acronym IP to mean "intellectual patrimony" ?

This reflects on both sides of the copyright deal and the patent
system:

1) the work/invention was created by somebody, who should be
   compensated as an encouragement to share the work/invention
   with the rest of humankind

2) ultimately the work/invention belongs to all of mankind and
   not to the author/inventor ... after all, the work/invention
   is based on thousands of years of cultural and technical
   development, the vast majority of which is used without any
   restrictions or royalties (eg. the wheel)

3) future generations should be able to use the new intellectual
   patrimony without any restriction, just like we are able to
   use old intellectual patrimony without any restrictions

kind regards,

Rik
-- 
Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH".
http://www.surriel.com/		http://guru.conectiva.com/
Current spamtrap:  <a href=mailto:"october@surriel.com">october@surriel.com</a>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/