Staples refuses to print my PDFs....
- Thread starter JVisgaitis
- Start date
- Status
Clearly we'll have to agree to disagree on this issue and the history behind it. I see the majority of current IP laws as an infringement against freedom of ideas.
(On the one hand -- B.A. in Philosophy '93 -- I've always rejected Kant's Universality Principle as self-contradictory. Nontheless, it seems like a commitment to constant innovation, competition, and expansion of ideas by every inventor would be consistent for someone who subscribed to Kantian philosophy. If not, like I say, Kant's thinking really seemed coherent to me.)
(On the one hand -- B.A. in Philosophy '93 -- I've always rejected Kant's Universality Principle as self-contradictory. Nontheless, it seems like a commitment to constant innovation, competition, and expansion of ideas by every inventor would be consistent for someone who subscribed to Kantian philosophy. If not, like I say, Kant's thinking really seemed coherent to me.)
Last edited:
Unless you weren't white or male.
Sure, forward thinking for their time, but not perfect.
Their decision to ignore the IP rights of others in order to jump start the American economy, while seeming to be a good idea at the time, was not ultimately good.
Great thinkers from St. Bernard of Clairveaux to Samuel Johnson have recognized that good intentions often lead to Hell. The Founders were trying to do what they thought was good for their country, but by ignoring the rights of others to the just fruits of their labors, they took an ethical shortcut.
(B.A. Philosophy '90 & Phi Sigma Tau Philosophy National Honor Society.) How is the principle "Before you act, ask whether you would want everyone else to act in substantially the same fashion." self-contradictory? Its just a reformulation of the Golden Rule- a cornerstone of most moral framworks and a driving force behind human rights.
There is no single philosophy (or theology, for that matter) that has all of the answers, but that's a pretty solid one.
Within Kant's framework, each inventor would ask "Before I use X's work without reimbursing/crediting them, would I want others to use my work without reimbursing/crediting me?" This question looms hugely each time an innovator realizes that his idea may not be a viable product unless he sinks millions of dollars into refining it. Even if he seeks outside investors, they're going to be asking essentially the same question- why invest with this guy if anyone can simply use his findings without recovery of our investment?
Brown Jenkin
First Post
the Lorax said:
Reading that it would seem to prohibit moving the pdf from the original download computer to any other computer you own even if you are just doing a regular upgrade (as is neccesary every 3 years or so) without express written permission from Wizards of the Coast. Technically moving a file from one computer to another even if the original is erased is reproducing the material and in violation of the copyright as epressed in the copyright notice. This to me is why copyright law needs fixing given the new didgital age. If the new DI has anything resembling this kind of copyright statement on the materials they offer they could be making criminals of a majority of thier customers who are not actually intending to break the law.
prosfilaes
Adventurer
Dannyalcatraz said:
Anyone who wants to be the next Disney. While a long copyright term benefits Disney now, I'm sure that it would have hurt Disney back in the day if they'd actually had to pay for Alice in Wonderland or Pinocchio or the Jungle Book.
Everything I've read says that the vast majority of books fall out of print in five years, which I suspect holds true for music and movies too. The difference between 28 and 40 years isn't going to make a difference for them, much less the difference between 28 and 95 years. And the time-value of money means that selling DVDs 75 years down the road is worth nothing in today's dollars.
thedungeondelver
Adventurer
Simply stand there, throw the disk or whatever media on the counter defiantly and say, "No, I refuse to print your PDF! There, what do you think of THAT?"
Then while they're standing there doing the whole "NORMAN 23 - COORDINATE - COORDINATE BOOP BOOP BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooo" thing, leap the counter and print that sucker.
's'always worked for me...
jgbrowning
Hero
Brown Jenkin said:
Even better: When you open the file you've purchased you've just actually made a copy from one memory medium to another.
joe b.
TheYeti1775
Adventurer
Creator +50 is even worse than what we have now.
As was mentioned if I take a PDF I purchased from WOTC with that copyright, and I had downloaded it to my harddrive into My Documents section and then copied it to my D&D directory after downloading when I'm doing my drive cleanup, I just committed a violation.
If I copy it to my flash drive, I committed a violation.
And if you want to be literal in your translation of copywrite law and all that jazz, only (hand) written things are copyrightable.
How's that for a strict interperation? 
In this day and age, let it be Time of Last Printing + 10 years with an option to renew one additonal 10 year period. Cause really how do you identify the past culturally anymore, by what decade it occurred in. So realistically using this someone could take the old OD&D/1E and renew interest in it as the last printing was 20 years ago. But would have to wait on 2E stuff. So if it is culturally significant to a person they could build on it, if it wasn't it falls by the wayside like a Pet Rock. By using the Last Printing, a company such as WOTC could keep printing OD&D/1E and have the copyright indefinitely, at least if it was profitable for them. If not, it allows someone else to pick it up. Also you have to include that it has to be printed every year, you can't just print once a decade to maintain it indefinitely.
Digital IP/Copywrite would have to be written seperately as a whole.
As was mentioned if I take a PDF I purchased from WOTC with that copyright, and I had downloaded it to my harddrive into My Documents section and then copied it to my D&D directory after downloading when I'm doing my drive cleanup, I just committed a violation.
If I copy it to my flash drive, I committed a violation.
And if you want to be literal in your translation of copywrite law and all that jazz, only (hand) written things are copyrightable.
How's that for a strict interperation? In this day and age, let it be Time of Last Printing + 10 years with an option to renew one additonal 10 year period. Cause really how do you identify the past culturally anymore, by what decade it occurred in. So realistically using this someone could take the old OD&D/1E and renew interest in it as the last printing was 20 years ago. But would have to wait on 2E stuff. So if it is culturally significant to a person they could build on it, if it wasn't it falls by the wayside like a Pet Rock. By using the Last Printing, a company such as WOTC could keep printing OD&D/1E and have the copyright indefinitely, at least if it was profitable for them. If not, it allows someone else to pick it up. Also you have to include that it has to be printed every year, you can't just print once a decade to maintain it indefinitely.
Digital IP/Copywrite would have to be written seperately as a whole.
TheYeti1775
Adventurer
Yup you have it on the Physical Drive and in the RAM. Those d@mn pirates.jgbrowning said:Even better: When you open the file you've purchased you've just actually made a copy from one memory medium to another.
joe b.
- Status
Similar Threads
