125 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2021
    1. it is also clear that there would be no need for copyleft licences to govern the exercise of copyright in software code by third-party developers at all if copyright did not guarantee rightsholders such a high degree of exclusive control over intellectual creations in the first place

      This is simply not true. The unique character of software under the conventions that most software is published (effectively obfuscated, albeit not for the purpose obfuscation itself, but for the purposes of producing an executable binary) means that reciprocal licenses like the GPL are very much reliant on the existing copyright regime. Ubiquitous and pervasive non-destructive compilation would be a prerequisite for a world where copyright's role on free software were nil.

  2. Jun 2021
    1. Same feature in TypeScript¶ It's worth mentioning that other languages have a shortcut for assignment var assignment directly from constructor parameters. So it seems especially painful that Ruby, despite being so beautifully elegant and succinct in other areas, still has no such shortcut for this. One of those other languages (CoffeeScript) is dead now, but TypeScript remains very much alive and allows you to write this (REPL): class Foo { constructor(public a:number, public b:number, private c:number) { } } instead of this boilerplate: class Foo { constructor(a, b, c) { this.a = a; this.b = b; this.c = c; } } (The public/private access modifiers actually disappear in the transpiled JavaScript code because it's only the TypeScript compiler that enforces those access modifiers, and it does so at compile time rather than at run time.) Further reading: https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/2/classes.html#parameter-properties https://basarat.gitbook.io/typescript/future-javascript/classes#define-using-constructor https://kendaleiv.com/typescript-constructor-assignment-public-and-private-keywords/ I actually wouldn't mind being able to use public/private modifiers on instance var parameters in Ruby, too, but if we did, I would suggest making that be an additional optional shortcut (for defining accessor methods for those instance vars) that builds on top of the instance var assignment parameter syntax described here. (See more detailed proposal in #__.) Accessors are more of a secondary concern to me: we can already define accessors pretty succinctly with attr_accessor and friends. The bigger pain point that I'm much more interested in having a succinct shortcut for is instance var assignment in constructors. initialize(@a, @b, @c) syntax¶ jsc (Justin Collins) wrote in #note-12: jjyr (Jinyang Jiang) wrote: I am surprised this syntax has been repeatedly requested and rejected since 7 years ago. ... As someone who has been writing Ruby for over 10 years, this syntax is exactly that I would like. I grow really tired of writing def initialize(a, b, c) @a = a @b = b @c = c end This would be perfect: def initialize(@a, @b, @c) end I'm a little bit sad Matz is against this syntax, as it seems so natural to me. Me too!! I've been writing Ruby for over 15 years, and this syntax seems like the most obvious, simple, natural, clear, unsurprising, and Ruby-like. I believe it would be readily understood by any Rubyist without any explanation required. Even if you saw it for the first time, I can't think of any way you could miss or misinterpret its meaning: since @a is in the same position as a local variable a would normally be, it seems abundantly clear that instead of assigning to a local variable, we're just assigning to the variable @a instead and of course you can reference the @a variable in the constructor body, too, exactly the same as you could with a local variable a passed as an argument. A workaround pattern¶ In the meantime, I've taken to defining my constructor and list of public accessors (if any) like this: attr_reader \ :a, :b def new( a, b) @a, @b = a, b end ... which is still horrendously boilerplatey and ugly, and probably most of you will hate — but by lining up the duplicated symbols into a table of columns, I like that I can at least more easily see the ugly duplication and cross-check that I've spelled them all correctly and handled them all consistently. :shrug: Please??¶ Almost every time I write a new class in Ruby, I wish for this feature and wonder if we'll ever get it. Can we please?
    1. TypeScript offers special syntax for turning a constructor parameter into a class property with the same name and value. These are called parameter properties

      Doesn't thisk violate their own non-goal #6, "Provide additional runtime functionality", since it emits a this.x = x run-time side effect in the body that isn't explicitly written out in the source code?

    1. Yeah, "virtual attribute" seems like dated terminology to me, so conceptually just a method.
    2. I see a 'virtual attribute' as something we're forced to implement when using frameworks, ORMs and the like. Something that lets us inject our code into the path of whatever metaprogramming has been put in place for us. In a simple PORO like this, I don't see how it has meaning; it's just a method. :)

      Hmm, good point. Maybe so. Though I think I'm fine with calling it a virtual property here too. :shrug:

    3. has_sauce is a "virtual attribute", a characteristic of the model that's dependent on the underlying toppings attribute.
  3. basarat.gitbook.io basarat.gitbook.io
    1. Having a member in a class and initializing it like below:class Foo { x: number; constructor(x:number) { this.x = x; }}is such a common pattern that TypeScript provides a shorthand where you can prefix the member with an access modifier and it is automatically declared on the class and copied from the constructor. So the previous example can be re-written as (notice public x:number):class Foo { constructor(public x:number) { }}
    1. Personal Property Has Not and Should Not Depend On TTPs For most of human history the dominant form of property has been personal property. The functionality of personal property has not under normal conditions ever depended on trusted third parties. Security properties of simple goods could be verified at sale or first use, and there was no need for continued interaction with the manufacturer or other third parties (other than on occasion repair personel after exceptional use and on a voluntary and temporary basis). Property rights for many kinds of chattel (portable property) were only minimally dependent on third parties – the only problem where TTPs were neededwas to defend against the depredations of other third parties. The main security property of personal chattel was often not other TTPs as protectors but rather its portability and intimacy. Here are some examples of the ubiquity of personal property in which there was a reality or at least a strong desire on the part of owners to be free of dependence on TTPs for functionality or security: Jewelry (far more often used for money in traditional cultures than coins, e.g. Northern Europe up to 1000 AD, and worn on the body for better property protection as well as decoration) Automobiles operated by and house doors opened by personal keys. Personal computers – in the original visions of many personal computing pioneers (e.g. many members of the Homebrew Computer Club), the PC was intended as personal property – the owner would have total control (and understanding) of the software running on the PC, including the ability to copy bits on the PC at will. Software complexity, Internet connectivity, and unresolved incentive mismatches between software publishers and users (PC owners) have substantially eroded the reality of the personal computer as personal property. This desire is instinctive and remains today. It manifests in consumer resistance when they discover unexpected dependence on and vulnerability to third parties in the devices they use. Suggestions that the functionality of personal property be dependent on third parties, even agreed to ones under strict conditions such as creditors until a chattel loan is paid off (a smart lien) are met with strong resistance. Making personal property functionality dependent on trusted third parties (i.e. trusted rather than forced by the protocol to keep to the agreement governing the security protocol and property) is in most cases quite unacceptable.

      Personal property did not depend on trusted third parties

      For most of human history personal property did not depend on Trusted Third Parties (TTP). To the extent that TTPs were needed, was to defend property from depredataions of other third parties.

      Jewelry, automobile keys, house keys — these all show that humans had a preference for having sovereign access to their property, without relying on third parties.

      This preference remains with us today and you can see it manifest itself in people's anger when they discover that part of their product is not owned by them.

    2. The main security property of personal chattel was often not other TTPs as protectors but rather its portability and intimacy.

      The security properties of personal chattel was not a Trusted Third Party (TTP), but their portability and intimacy.

  4. May 2021
    1. Although I believe people have a right to secure and private communication, I disagree with those who extrapolate from this that we have a right to anonymous property transfer. It’s totally in the public’s legitimate interest to keep track of who owns what, and to settle which transfers of ownership are legitimate, for instance by disallowing coerced ones.

      I found this thought helpful. I had feelings like this but could not articulate them before.

  5. Apr 2021
    1. food courts

      Superb construction, exclusive design, and modern architecture are some of the unique features of the project Gulshan One129 project recently launched by Gulshan Homz. From office space to commercial food court space in Noida, the mall caters to all your requirements. Each retail shop is excellently designed for better visibility and space utilization. If you are looking for a commercial property in Noida sector 129, book your space now and get the possession on or before June 2021.

  6. Mar 2021
    1. A semantic field denotes a segment of reality symbolized by a set of related words. The words in a semantic field share a common semantic property
    1. Whether a soil above the 250 isoline is prone to frostheave depends on its soil moisture regime and tex-ture class. Family texture classes are assigned bysoil moisture regime to the three frost action classesin exhibit 618–5 in the National Soil Survey Hand-book. Climates that have little snow cover overwinter, ample fall and winter precipitation, andseveral freeze and thaw cycles increase the inci-dence of frost heave damage
    1. Alalu baayam la donn.

      Il a hérité des biens de son père.

      alal+u (alal) ji -- property, fortune. 💰

      baay+am (baay) bi -- dad (his). 👨‍👦

      la -- he (?).

      donn v. -- to inherit.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c038e_5KY_U

  7. Feb 2021
    1. In this idealised utopia we obviously want to place value on sharing and curation as well as original creation, which means giving a small fraction of the payment to the re-publisher as well.We should note monetisation of all this content is optional. Some websites would allow their content to be transcluded for free, while others might charge hefty fees for a few sentences. If all goes well, we'd expect the majority of content on the web to be either free or priced at reasonable micro-amounts.

      While this is nice in theory, there's a long road strewn with attempts at micropayments on the web. I see new ones every six months or so. (Here's a recent one: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLqrvNoDE35lFDUv2enkaEKuo6ATBj9GmL)

      This also dramatically misses the idea of how copyright and intellectual property work in many countries with regard to fair use doctrine. For short quotes and excerpts almost anyone anywhere can do this for free already. It's definitely nice and proper to credit the original, but as a society we already have norms for how to do this.

  8. Nov 2020
    1. the adjective strong or the adverb strongly may be added to a mathematical notion to indicate a related stronger notion; for example, a strong antichain is an antichain satisfying certain additional conditions, and likewise a strongly regular graph is a regular graph meeting stronger conditions. When used in this way, the stronger notion (such as "strong antichain") is a technical term with a precisely defined meaning; the nature of the extra conditions cannot be derived from the definition of the weaker notion (such as "antichain")
    1. Imagine you have hundreds of tenants spread over a number of units, apartments, condominiums, etc. Now, can you remember each of them individually, whether each one of them has paid rentals? What is the payment period? What is the lease expiry date and much more? That’s complex, but possible when you have a Landlord Studio management app with you. With this app, you can;

      "If you wish to develop your own property management app, instead of subscribing to any third party, then you can consider hiring web developers or a development company."

  9. Oct 2020
    1. Computer software, for example, can be protected by copyright, patent, trade secret and trademark.

      did not know that

    1. James Bronterre O’Brien, told the people:‘Knaves will tell you that it is because you have no property, you are unrepresented. I tell you on the contrary, it is because you are unrepresented that you have no property …’16

      great quote

  10. Sep 2020
    1. For commercial property managers, adopting PropTech trends is a key aspect to stay in the race of business waves. Moreover, the industry is doing great by embracing the technologies in all possible ways.

      The article talks about some PropTech that are hailing in 2020. The commercial real estate agencies are adopting these technologies to provide best in class services to their clients.

    1. To make sure your ES modules are immediately usable by tools that work with CommonJS such as Node.js and webpack, you can use Rollup to compile to UMD or CommonJS format, and then point to that compiled version with the main property in your package.json file.
  11. Jul 2020
  12. May 2020
  13. Apr 2020
    1. To understand the High Line’s effect on surrounding property prices, we analysed publicly available valuation data from NYC’s Department of Finance, and cross-referenced it with property sales data for blocks and individual plots (a detailed methodology is available 👉 here). This meant we could track how the values of surrounding properties have changed since the High Line’s arrival.What’s interesting is that if we group the properties in bands roughly one kilometre wide from the High Line you start to see that between 2007 (when construction started) and 2018 (when the data ends), properties closer to the High Line experienced a greater value increase on average than those further away. So the mean property value uplift for houses within 1km of the High Line was actually 92% more than the Manhattan mean. Or to put it another way — if you owned an apartment in that 1km, you earned on average about $67,000 a year from the uplift alone. 🤑

    1. The patent right is but the right to exclude others, the very definition of “property.” That the property right represented by a patent, like other property rights, may be used in a scheme violative of antitrust laws creates no “conflict” between laws establishing any of those property rights and the antitrust laws.
  14. Mar 2020
    1. That page spreads confusion by using the misleading term “intellectual property rights”, which falsely presumes that trademark law and patent law and several other laws belong in one single conceptual framework. Use of that term is harmful, without exception, so after making a reference to someone else's use of the term, we should always reject it.
  15. Feb 2020
    1. Yet some things that we value are not private property—for example, the air we breathe and most of the knowledge we use cannot be owned, bought, or sold.
    2. Yet some things that we value are not private property—for example, the air we breathe and most of the knowledge we use cannot be owned, bought, or sold.
    1. Image Credit: Detail from "The School of Athens" by Raffaello Sanzio da Urbino (c. 1509–1511).

      Euclid's common notions appear to be grounds for many of Marx's arguments in Ch. 1, but also throughout the book.

      Near the beginning of Ch. 1 of the Elements Euclid lists them [PDF]:

      • Things that are equal to the same thing are also equal to one another (the Transitive property of a Euclidean relation).
      • If equals are added to equals, then the wholes are equal (Addition property of equality).
      • If equals are subtracted from equals, then the differences are equal (Subtraction property of equality).
      • Things that coincide with one another are equal to one another (Reflexive property).
      • The whole is greater than the part.

      Regarding the fifth, also see Aristotle, Metaphysics 8.6 [=1045a]; Topics 6.13 (=150a15-16);

      On the concept of the "whole-before-the-parts" (along with the "whole of the parts" and the "whole in the part"), also see Proclus, El. Theol., prop. 67.

  16. Dec 2019
    1. claim the gratitude of his child so completely

      Rather than entertain the negative consequences of his creation, Victor imagines creating a race that will worship him.

    2. It was with these feelings that I began the creation of a human being

      "Creation" points toward popular literary themes, and to the Bible. It also calls into question property rights. John Locke (1632-1704) argued in Two Treatises of Government that applying one's labor to nature made that creation one's property. Shelley seems to call into question the relation of scientific research to the idea of ownership.

  17. Nov 2019
    1. There used to be an imperfect but useful pathway for research to move from the academy to the corporate world through tech transfer.

      Used to be? It feels to me like it didn't really exist as a codified pathway until the early 2000's at best. Universities only seem to be mastering the entire flow in the past several years. Prior to that most professors took the intellectual property and did almost what they wanted with it and didn't provide any ancillary financial streams to the university out of which the work grew.

  18. Jul 2019
  19. Feb 2019
    1. On Evaluating Adversarial Robustness

      大神 Goodfellow 参与的 paper 怎能不收藏呢?对抗样本始终是一个相当难啃的骨头。。。。

      事实证明,正确评估针对对抗性案例的防御是非常困难的。尽管最近大量的工作试图设计出能够抵抗自适应攻击的防御措施,但很少有人成功;提出防御的大多数论文很快就被证明是错误的。作者认为一个很大的因素是执行安全评估的难度。在这篇论文中,作者讨论了方法论基础,回顾了普遍接受的最佳实践,并提出了评估对抗性示例的防御的新方法。这是一个开放性工作,贡献者包括Ian Goodfellow、Nicholas Carlini等人。

    2. Towards a Deeper Understanding of Adversarial Losses

      研究了各种对抗生成训练的 losses,还可以 know which one of them makes an adversarial loss better than another。

  20. Jan 2019
    1. Image Transformation can make Neural Networks more robust against Adversarial Examples

      这个小文就是想告诉我们,要想提高对抗样本的鲁棒性,“转一转”你手上的样本就好了。。。。。

  21. Dec 2018
    1. This resource, while written from the perspective of economists, explores how intellectual property laws (and historically uneven enforcement of the laws) have increased the divide between developing countries and wealthy, industrialized developed countries.

    1. That said, for a thoughtful survey of how the commons, cultural and otherwise, might thrive inside of, or along with, with current conditions I recommend Peter Barnes’s book, Capitalism 3.0: A Guide to Reclaiming the Commons. One of Barnes’s points is that our debates about the future often imagine only two actors: the government and private business. Barnes suggests a third set, common property trusts (as, for example, the kind of land trusts devised by the Nature Conservancy). There is much to say about common property trusts but for now the point is simply that we already have a mix of cultural modes and should continue to have them going forward with, I hope, the commons recognized and strengthened.

      One of the areas I find challenging in addressing Creative Commons culture is how Creative Commons relates to capitalistic culture (or rejects it). Creative Commons can be compatible with open market, but it can also challenge some of the fundamental tenants of it. Throughout the units, as I tried to imagine applications of Creative Commons, or making licensing decisions as a creative and academic, I found that I had questions about artists and how they can earn a living in this model, and how this model supported and challenged my role as a librarian in academe.

  22. Nov 2018
    1. Analyzing the Noise Robustness of Deep Neural Networks

      清华的这篇文章似乎有着很不错的可视化图像,企图对模型对抗性进行可视化解释,不知道他们是否有在非DL模型上去考察对抗样本是如何分错的?毕竟并不仅仅是复杂模型才会有对抗问题哦。。

    2. Interpreting Adversarial Robustness: A View from Decision Surface in Input Space

      通常人们都认为,局部最小损失的超平面在参数空间中越平坦,就意味着泛化能力越好。但此文通过可视化某种决策边界认为在原始输入空间中就可以察觉到对抗性鲁棒的端倪~(这个结论还需广泛复现吧,自己不试验下也不敢确信,毕竟缺乏理论基础~[可怜])

    3. Spurious samples in deep generative models: bug or feature?

      此文引言还算引人入胜的。全文似乎就为了阐述一件事情:Spurious samples are not simply errors but a feature of deep generative nets. 但我怎么觉得这是一句废话呢?不然你以为 generate model 是根据什么 generate samples 的呢?

    4. Adversarial Attacks and Defences: A Survey

      一篇印度人写的对抗性防御的综述paper。

    5. Is Robustness the Cost of Accuracy? -- A Comprehensive Study on the Robustness of 18 Deep Image Classification Models

      这文帅了~ 信息丰富 超多的图~ 让人眼前一亮~

      探讨了18个模型的鲁棒性和准确率。结论很多,如模型构架是影响鲁棒性和准确率的重要因素(似乎是废话);相似模型构架基础上增加“深度”对鲁棒性的提升很微弱;有些模型(Vgg类)的表现出很强的对抗样本迁移性。。。

    6. Obfuscated Gradients Give a False Sense of Security: Circumventing Defenses to Adversarial Examples
      SUMMARY (From)

      The researchers found that defenses against adversarial examples commonly use obfuscated gradients, which create a false sense of security but, in fact, can be easily circumvented. The study describes three ways in which defenses obfuscate gradients and shows which techniques can circumvent the defenses. The findings can help organizations that use defenses relying on obfuscated gradients to fortify their current methods.

      WHAT’S THE CORE IDEA OF THIS PAPER?
      • There are three common ways in which defenses obfuscate gradients:
      • shattered gradients are nonexistent or incorrect gradients caused by the defense either intentionally (through non-differentiable operations) or unintentionally (through numerical instability);
      • stochastic gradients are caused by randomized defenses;
      • vanishing/exploding gradients are caused by extremely deep neural network evaluation.

      • There are number of clues that something is wrong with the gradient including:

        • one-step attacks performing better than iterative attacks;
        • black-box attacks working better than white-box attacks;
        • unbounded attacks not reaching 100% success;
        • random sampling finding adversarial examples;
        • increasing distortion bound not leading to increased success.
      WHAT’S THE KEY ACHIEVEMENT?
      • Demonstrating that most of the defense techniques used these days are vulnerable to attacks, namely:
        • 7 out of 9 defense techniques accepted at ICLR 2018 cause obfuscated gradients;
        • new attack techniques developed by researchers were able to successfully circumvent 6 defenses completely and 1 partially.
      WHAT DOES THE AI COMMUNITY THINK?
      • The paper won the Best Paper Award at ICML 2018, one of the key machine learning conferences.
      • The paper highlights the strengths and weaknesses of current technology.
      WHAT ARE FUTURE RESEARCH AREAS?
      • To construct defenses with careful and thorough evaluation so that they can defend against not only existing attacks but also future attacks that may be developed.
      WHAT ARE POSSIBLE BUSINESS APPLICATIONS?
      • By using the guidance provided in the research paper, organizations can identify if their defenses rely on obfuscated gradients, and if necessary, switch to more robust methods.
    7. Seamless Nudity Censorship: an Image-to-Image Translation Approach based on Adversarial Training

      【用GAN给裸女自动“穿”上比基尼】

      这么多人对这篇文章经验的实验效果表示赞叹和好奇~ 我也去瞻仰一番去。。。

    8. Generating Natural Adversarial Examples

      讨论对抗样本生成的~

    9. Are adversarial examples inevitable?

      从结论部分来看,分析了“问题”成因,“问题”分类,“问题”特性,“问题”本质,可谓“问题”之不可避免而任重而道远,就说没提“问题”的解决办法。。。

      现在关于对抗性的 paper 都要不可避免的谨慎对待啊~

    10. Defensive Dropout for Hardening Deep Neural Networks under Adversarial Attacks

      貌似就是利用 dropout 来防御对抗样本~ 然而前两天才看了 Goodfellow 在 cs231n 2017 Spring 上的报告提到说,一切用传统正则化技巧企图防御的手段都是失效的~当然包括 dropout~ 比如可以看看 Nicholas Carlini 的文章。

      贴上Goodfellow讲座的 Slice 和笔记:https://iphysresearch.github.io/cs231n/cs231n_Guest%20Lecture.%20Adversarial%20Examples%20and%20Adversarial%20Training.html

  23. Oct 2018
    1. how do we help students navigate privacy issues in learning spaces augmented with social/digital media. There was a specific request for examples to walk students through this. Here is what I do.

      I'm a little unnerved by the semi-legal nature of the "Interactive Project Release Form" but I think it's a great model (whether really legally enforceable or just a class constitution-type document).

  24. Aug 2018
  25. Apr 2018
    1. Thus the grass my horse has bit; the turfs my servant has cut; and the ore I have digged in any place, where I have a right to them in common with others, become my property, without the assignation or consent of any body. The labour that was mine, removing them out of that common state they were in, hath fixed my property in them.

      It would be very interesting to discuss this and the surrounding passages in light of the armed standoff that occurred in either Oregon or Washington about a year ago regarding the use of federal lands for grazing purposes by the local ranchers.

    2. Whatsoever then he removes out of the state that nature hath provided, and left it in, he hath mixed his labour with, and joined to it something that is his own, and thereby makes it his property. It being by him removed from the common state nature hath placed it in, it hath by this labour something annexed to it, that excludes the common right of other men: for this labour being the unquestionable property of the labourer, no man but he can have a right to what that is once joined to, at least where there is enough, and as good, left in common for others.

      Useful passage to point out the tension between "Civic virtue and the responsibility to the greater good (see end of passage) vs. individual property rights. Useful to frame discussions re: natural parks, utilitarian vs. preservationist perspectives on environmental policies, taxation policies & burdens, entitlements etc etc.

  26. Apr 2017
    1. The ability to establish ownership claims to digital assets — of well-understood forms of intellectual property such as music, movies and books but also for emergent and increasingly critical ones such as computer code, digital art, user-generated data and metadata — will transform many of the 21st century’s largest negative externalities into a new asset class capable of powering the next economic revolution.
    2. What is needed is a trustworthy, secure, and enduring property system that is flexible enough to incorporate digital properties into any community’s broader property rights traditions
    3. a property is an asset plus a property title
    4. A valid ownership claim functions as a “bundle of rights” for a specific property and can include such rights as:the right to exclusive possessionthe right to exclusive use and enclosurethe right to transfer ownership (conveyance)the right to use as collateral to secure a debt (hypothecation)the right to subdivide (partition)
  27. Feb 2017
  28. Nov 2016
    1. Castro’s commitment to fighting racism in Cuba wasn’t as much an explicit mission as it was a convenient byproduct of adopting the Soviet model of governance — when you start to eliminate private property, mechanisms of systemic racism are rendered impotent.

      I love this paragraph.

  29. Sep 2016
    1. d  Provider  has  a  limited,  nonexclusive  license  solely  for  the  purpose  of  performing  its  obligations  as  outlined  in  the  Agreeme

      Here we are good and much better than, say, Genius:

      When you post User Content to the Service or otherwise submit it to us, you hereby grant, and you represent and warrant that you have the right to grant, to Genius an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense through multiple tiers) to use, reproduce, publicly perform, publicly display, modify, translate, excerpt (in whole or in part), create derivative works of, distribute and otherwise fully exploit all Intellectual Property Rights in and to such User Content for purposes of providing, operating and promoting the Service or otherwise conducting the business of Genius.

    2.  all  intellectual  property  rights,  shall  remain  the  exclusive  property  of  the  [School/District],

      This is definitely not the case. Even in private groups would it ever make sense to say this?

  30. Jul 2016
    1. I could have easily chosen a different prepositional phrase. "Convivial Tools in an Age of Big Data.” Or “Convivial Tools in an Age of DRM.” Or “Convivial Tools in an Age of Venture-Funded Education Technology Startups.” Or “Convivial Tools in an Age of Doxxing and Trolls."

      The Others.

    1. Or do we really even own ideas?), and why we would even fuss about ownership might suggest an attachment of monetary value to the shared thing. Or is it really about wanting to get credit? Can we get credit without staking ownership?

      I think credit has a lot to do with it. Also, feeling like you "own" your idea is largely cultural. We live in society where just ideas alone are sellable (corporate world especially). We have been taught since college that you do not amount to anything without ideas even though your ideas are built upon ideas of others, we do not teach that kind of connectivity, we do not teach "collective knowledge." What we do teach is publishing a paper and copyrighting it. One of the most prominent questions I have from faculty I work with in regards to creating a public professional ePortfolio is "What if someone copies, steals my idea or paper?" and "How do I make it so that only particular people can see it?" I am sure stealing does happen because there is a lot of pressure in academia to "generate" ideas. And I am also thinking that publishing your copyrighted idea in a peer-reviewed or any other academic publishing instance gives your work "validity." But if the mind set we build in our students is ownership-oriented how can we expect anything else?

  31. Apr 2016
  32. Oct 2015
    1. “You can’t have this horse. We want it,”

      Just like that.. Knowing what kind of bond you can form with a horse, I'd be extremely upset if someone were to take one away that I'd had since I was a child just because they wanted it.

  33. Jul 2015
    1. Sec. 15-7. - Injuring or defacing library property. Whoever willfully injures or defaces any book, newspaper, magazine, pamphlet, manuscript, or other property belonging to the city library by writing, marking, tearing, breaking, or otherwise mutilating shall be fined as provided in section 1-8. (Code 1964, amended, § 19.19(A)) Cross reference— Damage to public property, § 17-26. State Law reference— Criminal mischief, V.A.P.C. § 28.03; reckless damage of property, § 28.04.
    1. Third, there are valid concerns about some aspects of GE agriculture, such as herbicides, monocultures, and patents. But none of these concerns is fundamentally about genetic engineering.

      Totally. Whenever I end up in conversations about GMOs I steer the conversation toward monoculture and intellectual property. These are issues I have concerns about and I think the labeling wars are hurting our chances for useful dialog here. I don't want labeling. I want biodiversity.

  34. Jun 2014
    1. If we clear a path to the creation of compelling electric vehicles, but then lay intellectual property landmines behind us to inhibit others, we are acting in a manner contrary to that goal.
  35. Feb 2014
    1. The innate qualities of intellectual pr operty, however, in combination with INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: POLICY FOR INNOVATION 15   strong economic motivations have led U.S. intellectual property policy to operate according to rights - based, non - utilitarian theory, possibly as a result of lobbying (capture theory).

      Lobbying has led to a rights-based non-utilitarian theory copyright policy in the US at the present time (2014).

    2. The U.S. social contract establishes a utilitarian basis for protection of intellectual property rights: protection as a means of encouraging innovation.

      The social contract of the US Constitution provides a utilitarian basis for protection of intellectual property rights.

    3. As intellectual property lacks scarcity, and the protection of it fails the Lockean Proviso, there is no natural right to intellectual property. As such, the justification for intellectual property rights arises from the social con tract, and in the case of the United States, the Constitution.

      The justification for intellectual property from the social contract established by the US Constitution; it otherwise has no justification by natural right because it fails the Lockean Proviso.

    4. By contrast, any positive or negative effects that intellectual property rights have on the wider populace are diffused, and any individual member of the wider populace has little motive (and potentially insufficient means) to overco me the significant barriers to active political lobbying. As a result, the intrinsic trend is for intellectual INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: POLICY FOR INNOVATION 11   property holders to actively lobby, largely unopposed, for greater rights protections. (Fisher, 1999, Sect. II. C.)

      Both positive and negative effects stemming from intellectual property rights to the wider populace are diffused, thus the wider populace has little motive to oppose changes to laws and policies that support intellectual property.

    5. On one hand, there are infinite ideas, and so the taking of one idea as private property clearly leaves “enough,” and debatably “as good” for others (Locke, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: POLICY FOR INNOVATION 8   1690, Chap. V, Sect. 27).

      This statement seems to me a stretch-- a very far stretch.

      What does it mean to have "infinite ideas"? And how do you arrive at the judgments "enough" and "as good" here?

      Ideas don't exist in isolation; they are not individual fruits to be plucked from the world of thought. Ideas are built upon other ideas. They are embedded within each other, juxtaposed one next to the other, stacked, remixed; varied one from the other, sometimes as a derivation, sometimes an inspiration.

      And in the face of this, what is the notion of "creation"? Given a certain base of knowledge, there are some natural next steps that can be built from those basic building blocks.

      Here we have to disentangle the notion of discovery from creation. I think maybe that, in part, is the notion of patents vs copyright, but in the land of software we seem to have a tangled mess.

    6. Here, there is disagreement about whether intellectual property violates the Lockean Proviso.

      Does the notion of intellectual property violate the Lockean Proviso?

    7. The limit of any property rights that can be claimed in this manner are defined in the ‘Lockean Proviso’ which states that the aforementioned process of establishing private property only operates “when there is enoug h, and as good, left in common for others” (Bogart, 1985, p. 828; Locke, 1690, Chap. V, Sect. 27).
    8. The Privatization of the Natural State Proponents also invoke Locke’s discussion of the making of private property from the natural state by the joining of one’s efforts to the natural state (Menell, 1999, p. 129). The argument goes that authors (ar tists, inventors, etc.) join their efforts to the natural state of undefined ideas, and through their efforts arrive at an intellectual work; and by that effort, they may make a legitimate claim on that intellectual work as their property (Menell, 1999, p. 129; Locke, 1690, Chap. V, Sect. 26).
    9. these traditional property rights, as suggested by Locke, depend on the scarcity of that property (1995, n. pag.). I f ‘Joe’ owns property and ‘Sue’ acquires it, then Joe no longer has it, and Sue has harmed Joe (by stealing). Joe’s property is scarce.
    10. This is understatement to be sure, but the debate has been principally between two theories: a utilitarian policy theory, and a rights - based , non - utilitarian property theory (Long, 1995, n.pag.) .

      The debate in intellectual property law has centered around utilitarian policy theory and a rights-based non-utilitarian property theory.

    11. U.S. intellectual property law originates (as law) from the Constitution: Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the Constitution makes copyright and patent law possible (“To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: POLICY FOR INNOVATION 4   respective Writings and Discoveries”) ,

      Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 makes copyright and patent law possible.

    12. This paper establishes cause to suspect that current intellectual property policy overstep s utilitarian justification, and suggests that a clearer distinction should be drawn between the proper role of U.S. law in intellectual property (that which promotes innovation) and moral questions of creator’s rights.
    13. The U . S . Co nstitution firmly grounds the proper role of intellectual property policy as utilitarian .

      Identify where/how this ground is established.

    14. Keywords : anticommons, copyright, intellectual property, Lockean Proviso, patent, property rights, state of nature, trademark, utilitarian theory
    1. A LOCKEAN JUSTIFICATION

      Locke's Two Treatises of Government

    2. A universal definition of intellectual property might begin by identifying it as nonphysical property which stems from, is identified as, and whose value is based upon some idea or ideas. Furthermore, there must be some additional element of novelty. Indeed, the object, or res, of intellectual property may be so new that it is unknown to anyone else. The novelty, however, does not have to be absolute. What is important is that at the time of propertization the idea is thought to be generally unknown. The re

      Intellectual property cannot be common currency in the intellectual life of the society at the time of propertization.

      What constitutes society at this point; do small groups and communities suffice or does it have to be popularly known beyond a small few?

    3. At the most practical level, intellectual property is the property created or recognized by the existing legal regimes of copyright, patent, trademark, and trade secret. n17 We also must include property recognized by similar legal regimes. For example, federal law now protect original semiconductor masks. n18 "Gathered information" is another genre of intellectual property. Copyright law protects the particular arrangement of the contents of telephone directories and reference works, n19 while other forms of gathered information may have quasi-property status under International News Service v. Associated Press. n20

      Intellectual property is the property created or recognized by the existing legal regimes:

      • copyright
      • patent
      • trademark
      • trade secret

      And other legal regimes including:

      • semiconductor masks
      • gathered information
      • particular arrangements of directories and reference works
      • quasi-property status
    4. Like most subjects, intellectual property has grey zones on the periphery, such as the right to publicity -- whether, in property style, someone can control his public image.

      Right to publicity

    5. inasmuch as coming to own intellectual property is often tied to being well-educated. If people become increasingly progressive with increasing education, intellectual property confers economic power on men and women of talent who generally tend to reform society, not because they are haphazard Burkian goblins, but because they have well-informed convictions.
    6. ctual property may be a liberal influence on society

      Intellectual property may be a liberal influence on society.

    7. The breakthrough patent that produces a Polaroid company is more the exception than the rule. The rule is the modestly successful novelist, the minor [*292] poet, and the university researcher -- all of whom may profit by licensing or selling their creations.

      Breakthrough patent of Polaroid (the exception) vs modestly successful novelist (the more common case)

    8. ecause such accumulation is less typical, the realm of intellectual property has less of the laborer/capitalist hierarchy of Marxist theory.
    9. In the final analysis, intellectual property shares much of the origins and orientation of all forms of property. At the same time, however, it is a more neutral institution than other forms of property: its limited scope and duration tend to prevent the very accumulation of wealth that Burke championed.
    10. One cannot call the history of intellectual property a purely proletarian struggle. While ancient Roman laws afforded a form of copyright protection to authors, n14 the rise of Anglo-Saxon copyright was a saga of publishing interests attempting to protect a concentrated market and a central government attempting to apply a subtle form of censorship to the new technology of the printing press.

      One cannot call the history of intellectual property a purely proletarian struggle.

    11. But this is only part of the truth. Much intellectual property is produced only after considerable financial investment, whether it be in the research laboratory or in the graduate education of the scientist using the facility.

      Intellectual property is more egalitarian than property in that anyone may obtain it for limited duration, however that is only part of the truth, and in practice it is more likely that most intellectual property is produced only after considerable financial investment.

    12. The conservative influence of property does not, however, depend on primogeniture or even inheritance -- features that gave property a valuable role in Burke's political system as well as in the political theories advanced by Hegel and Plato. n11 Within a single lifetime, property tends to make the property owner more risk-averse. This aversion applies both to public decisions [*291] affecting property, such as taxes, and to personal decisions that might diminish one's property, such as investment strategies and career choices. Inheritance and capital appreciation are only additional characteristics of traditional notions of property that tend to stabilize social stratification.
    13. In the eighteenth century, Edmund Burke argued that property stabilized society and prevented political and social turmoil that, he believed, would result from a purely meritocratic order. n8 Property served as a counterweight protecting the class of persons who possessed it against competition from nonpropertied people of natural ability and talent. To Burke, the French National Assembly -- dominated by upstart lawyers from the provinces -- exemplified the risk of disorder and inexperience of an unpropertied leadership. n9 In contrast, the British parliament, a proper mix of talented commoners and propertied Lords, ruled successfully.
    14. Intellectual property is far more egalitarian. Of limited duration and obtainable by anyone, intellectual property can be seen as a reward, an empowering instrument, for the talented upstarts Burke sought to restrain. Intellectual property is often the propertization of what we call "talent." It tends to shift the balance toward the talented newcomers whom Burke mistrusted

      intellectual property is often the propertization of what we call talent.

    15. In many quarters, property is viewed as an inherently conservative concept --

      a social device for maintenance of the status quo

    16. WHAT COUNTS AS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY?
    17. The Philosophy of Intellectual Property