agreed about the right to believe. agreed also about the fact that the majority is not
always right. but you seem to have overlooked a lot of things i had written before that.
please do give that also a thought.
v. sasi kumar
all members of parliament can get more votes than sunil. therefore going by
your logic should i entrust them with the task of writing the basic tenets
of philosophy of science? just because someone is an infectious speaker does
not make them right. no, what he is saying is his belief system and he has a
right to have that and you have as much right to believe in something that i
consider wrong or questionable.
cmd, james martin & co
president, digital partners india
n-103, panchsheel park,
new delhi - 110 017
v: 649 9384/5; 649 4384/5
f: 649 4380
----- Original Message -----
From: "V. Sasi Kumar" <vsasi(a)vsnl.com>
To: "satish jha" <sjha(a)vsnl.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 10:28 AM
Subject: Re: [Fsf-friends] Re: [bytesforall_readers] Microsoft to
shareWindows code withIndia
On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 01:03, satish jha wrote:
> thanks much. went to the recommended site. i don't think you need ti
oversimplify it. it is oversimplified in itself though it could do with a
bit of editing.
> having seen it, read it i am persuaded that its propounders live in a
their own and have a right to do so.
i believe that without intellectual property rights there may have been
innovation, technolgy development and progres would have taken
another path altogether and it can be shown that at least in terms of
economics as we know it, it would be a sub-optimal model compared to what we
You forget that a large part of development took place without what you
call "intellectual property rights". Those who claim rights for
"intellectual property" forget that they have made ample use of similar
"intellectual property" that others could have laid claim to. Would they
be willing to share their "property rights" with everyone who has
contributed towards its generation, right from the people who invented
the wheel? Remember, even Isaac Newton, one of the greatest scientists
ever, said that "If I have seen further, it is because I have stood on
the shoulders of giants".
In India we have a model of knowledge that has been of tremendous value
to humanity, which grew, and continues to grow, without the benefit of
"intellectual property rights" - I refer to Ayurveda. But I tend to
agree with you when you say that there may have been a different path
of progress if "intellectual property rights" - that path would have led
to a more equitable society, something that is much more valuable to
people like us in this list than what goes by the word "progress" today.
i do not wish to debate it on this forum for a variety of reasons and
while the debate has a place on this forum, it may not be the
right place for allocating majority of its time to free software etc.
I think if you had no desire to debate this on this forum, then you
should not have raised the question here.
> you are an infectious speaker and will always sway people your way. that
not persuade me to go along with the substance of it though.
What you are essentially saying is that you admit that what Sunil said
is true, but you are not willing to admit it. That is really good.
> thanks much
> satish jha
> cmd, james martin & co
> president, digital partners india
> n-103, panchsheel park,
> new delhi - 110 017
> v: 649 9384/5; 649 4384/5
> f: 649 4380
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: sunil
> To: bytesforall_readers(a)yahoogroups.com
> Cc: linux-india-general(a)lists.sourceforge.net ; fsf-friends(a)gnu.org.in
> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 5:21 PM
> Subject: Re: [bytesforall_readers] Microsoft to share Windows code
> Dear Satish,
> Free Software is not Open Source Software. Access to code is not the
> issue. Free License implies Ownership and
Control. It is not the
> coke but the ownership of coke.
> Copyrighting is the root cause of the digital divide... here is an
> oversimplification so that you can understand..
> Before the concept of Private Property:
> No Economic Divide
> After the concept of Private Property:
> Land Owners
> Economic Divide
> Before the concept of Intellectual Property:-
> No Digital Divide
> After the concept of Intellectual Property:
> Those with Knowledge
> Those without Knowledge
> Digital Divide
> You will notice this trend in all forms of privatization:- water,
> gestures, ideas, products etc.
> General Public License transfers ownership of digital assets to the
> To use a Marxist phrase - the means of
production in the knowledge
> will be transfered to the poor. This is a
'critical' component of any
> digital divide intervention.Without this type of systemic intervention
other ICT is
merely technology band-aid.
Please see my IIM-B presentation for more details:
Sunil Abraham [MAHITI]
314/1, 7th Cross, Domlur
Bangalore - 560 071 Karnataka, INDIA
Ph/Fax: +91 80 5352003. Pager: 9624 279519
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.