[Reader-list] re: reader, boell, lab, adorno, jail, textz.com

[Andreas Broeckmann]

dear frederic,

>  > i thought that Britta's intervention was very important because she
>>  reminds us to maybe start thinking about these issues from the
>>  perspective of an 'owner': imagine something that you own personally
>>  and that you use to make a living (a car, a computer, a contract, a
>>  story to tell, a data-base of contacts, etc.) and imagine that
>>  somebody demands to freely use your property because s/he does not
>>  accept your property claim.
>
>that's theorically ok, I think, as long as the person in question is 
>engaged in
>the same exercise him/herself. which means that this is a very rethorical
>argument, andreas, all of this will only function on the morning of The Big
>Night, you know!

i don't understand what you are saying in your first sentence (you 
mean that sound artists who use samples legally have to accept that 
some of their own samples are used illegally? or are you saying that 
copyright ownership should be restricted to people who produce 
copyrightable materials?? and what's The Big Night? - please, try to 
explain that again.)


>this kind of reasoning cannot be used, it's like asking someone who is against
>capital punishement "what would you do if your daughter was raped and
>tortured ?" (a bit like)

i don't see why this analogy should apply. the standard 
conscientious-objector-answer for your question is: 'i exert my right 
to self-defense and stop them by the least necessary means'.

why are you saying that it is unfair to raise the question about 
'something you own yourself'?


greetings,
-a