Article View: news.admin
Article #3760Re: Harmlessness of a.b.p.e (long, but read it anyway)
From: Daniel Zabetakis
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 01:28
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 01:28
42 lines
3022 bytes
3022 bytes
In article <1992Nov18.225743.12386@clarinet.com> brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton) writes: > >Many people misunderstand copyright as strictly the right to sell a work. >It is not. It is the right to control what is done with your creation. >The most obvious benefit of this control is the right to charge money for >granting permission to copy, but it is not the entirety of it. > I think that if they aren't being hurt, that most creators would be happy that others are making good use of thier works. At least works that they have exposed to the public. Since I think a.b.p.e is harmless, I think most creators wouldn't object to it. I don't think I would. > >This argued, even the argument that this does not hurt the creators does not >hold water. Penthouse has recently started an online service. This makes me worry. I don't want the commercial world to conflict with the usenet world. This online service will be the first big direct conflict. Of course, there is no doubt that Penthouse will win. And they will need to take action. I can't imagine an online service being really profitable with a.b.p.e to redistribute the product to 80% of your potential market. (Remember that Event Horizons was stealing it's raw material). So if they are serious about the online service, a.b.p.e will eventually be shut down. Alt.sex.pictures began an experiment in freedom of information. It was a tremendous success. I have argued that it never was harmful. As a collection of individuals scanning and posting a few favorite pictures, it was small potatoes. I think the current controversy revolves around the fact that even though the character hasn't changed the size has grown with the number of users. Even though a.b.p.e is still an unorganized group of individuals, it is big by any measure. Without harm, freedom should rule. If online services had existed before usenet, I would have had no problem with opposing a.s.p. But since a.s.p came first, it will be a real loss of freedom if new industries kill it. It will be a great pity, I think, if the desire to make money restricts our ability to use the net for whatever the users want it for. DanZ -- This article is for entertainment purposes only. Any facts, opinions, narratives or ideas contained herein are not necessarily true, and do not necessarily represent the views of any particular person.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Nov20.012853.14667@news.columbia.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!wupost!uwm.edu!rpi!news.columbia.edu!cubmol!danReferences:
<1992Nov18.003412.10710@news.columbia.edu> <1992Nov18.225743.12386@clarinet.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.admin.policy Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!wupost!uwm.edu!rpi!news.columbia.edu!cubmol!dan From: dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis) Subject: Re: Harmlessness of a.b.p.e (long, but read it anyway) Message-ID: <1992Nov20.012853.14667@news.columbia.edu> Sender: usenet@news.columbia.edu (The Network News) Nntp-Posting-Host: cubmol.bio.columbia.edu Organization: Columbia University, Dept. of Biological Sciences. References: <1992Nov18.003412.10710@news.columbia.edu> <1992Nov18.225743.12386@clarinet.com> Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 01:28:53 GMT Lines: 43