Wednesday, September 07, 2005

Rights and Wrongs in Copy Right

In her weblog, Shirin had raised an issue which seems to have kindled a fire, however friendly: Copyright. Some straitforward points:
  1. Iran has not signed up to the international Copy Right Act and can legally copy. Yet, one should also note that, for that matter, Iran is a loser too: all other countries have the right to copy Iranian products too, unless they are registered internationally. So please do not moralise things and do not blame Iran for breaching a law which it has not singed up to.
  2. I have been to boot sales around the UK; I have seen loads and loads of people selling softwares and dvds almost at the same price that you may find in Vali Asr st. in Tehran. All were buying and nobody's conscience seemed tortured.
  3. Copy Right issue on sotfwares is by itself a controversial one. Already Mircosoft is losing its grip on its monopolised exploitation; at least that's good news. Linux and other Open Source softwares are effectively challenging Microsoft on this.
  4. It is so vital that sometimes Copy Right is discussed within the context of world justice too. I am not saying that it is right to ignore Copy Right, I am just saying let's see how much respect the world is showing to the orignial thinkers all around the world. To the Indians who intruduced numerical 1-9 system, to the Iranians for their unemployement payment system, etc. Sometimes, some people feel historically so underrated that they may not feel positively motivated to respect the rules of the new masters who have not paid their historial copy right fees. It may not seem legal, yet it may not exactly feel theft for some people either.
  5. I do agree with Shirin that at least within the borders of Iran we should begin practicing to respect and value what Iranians create. I am specfically referring to what Shirin has put their as her own experiences or so many other unheard cases.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Behrooz - Well said. I went through your post just to see if there is anything there that I might have an objection 2, and the answer is no. I agree. Well done. Cheers :)

GazanKhan said...

Hi my friend, today I visited your blog again and I suddenly saw the name of my blog among your links, I'm honored. I guess except Shirin, you are the only person who has done thins, I thank you for that AND I'm going to tell a really funny and at same time sad true story, an anecdote, today when I'm back just for you and Shirin.OK? till then then.
P.S. As I have said it before, I'm new in this and still don't know how to manage my blog: to add links and other thing; a friend of mine made this blog for me.

Anonymous said...

Agree with Farzad: U wrapped it up nicely.

Shirin said...

I see what you are saying honey. But do you not think it’s about time we let bygones be bygones and started afresh? Because the way I see it, this whole ‘they stole from us so now we have the right to steal from them’ is not actually doing anyone (most of all us Iranians) any favours.

Anonymous said...

Shirin, I think your interpretation of what I have said is more what you want to get from it.
1. You may reason people into accepting something, but to capture their hearts to do it is something else.
2. I said I do not mean to ignore copy right, I said I want it to be seen in a bigger picture. I am not talking about history; I refer to now and here: people in the world may, rightfully, associate Bill Gates with what happens in Iraq. It's a long-story.
3. Once a Doctor from Berkshire after London bombing said: "Civilians are killed; cause is irrelevant." Why they don't say the same about tens of thousands killed in iraq and other places.
4. If you fail to persuade people that justice is ruling the world you cannot expect them to observe justice wherever you wish them to.

Shirin said...

Yo, chill out mon!

s said...

Sorry I'm a little late, jumping on (or off, as the case may be) this bandwagon....

We all know how medieval artists never signed their names to their paintings, right? The idea being that their art was a labor of love... of divine love... that inspired and guided their work in the first place, and that putting a personal name to it would be tantamount to blasphemy.

So here's my question: whatever happened to humility?!

P.S. this is strictly a philosophical question, since I realize only a few in a billion artists have wealthy patrons, although fewer still manage to even get by with "royalties"....