Re: [Air-L] Air-L Digest, Vol 39, Issue 10
On 10/10/2007, at 6:34 AM, air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org wrote:
For instance we don't have the same background of libertarianism in Canada. We like our good government, peace and order.
Nice use of the 1960s cultural myth of Canada. The liberal party lost hold of government in the last election because of a corruption scandal. Money has a huge, often corrupting influence on politics in most countries. Canada is no exception. Libertarianism has had many guises in Canada from the Western wing of the conservatives to the more left-leaning folks who were behind the (about-to-be turned-back) reforms in laws around the prohibition of marijuana. (Mark Emory is nothing if not a libertarian.)
I will listen to his interview but I like to offer the above warning. I did learn a lot reading his book but that was his technical analysis which was a bit of a help even if borrowed and inaccurate.
Missing the point of a lot of Lessig's work if you accuse him of borrowing.
I did not say I did not get his point in Code. His thesis that technology makes law when laws involves technology is still good. Peter Timusk, B.Math statistics (2002), B.A. legal studies (2006) Carleton University Systems Science Graduate student, University of Ottawa. just trying to stay linear. Read by hundreds of lurkers every week. On 9-Oct-07, at 6:54 PM, Margie Borschke wrote:
I will listen to his interview but I like to offer the above warning. I did learn a lot reading his book but that was his technical analysis which was a bit of a help even if borrowed and inaccurate.
Missing the point of a lot of Lessig's work if you accuse him of borrowing.
I think you are confusing my points about legal culture with the corruption issues and I wasn't saying anything about corruption really sorry if that wasn't clear. I will possibly approach Lessig with an open mind for his new issue. I really wasn't trying to say that Canada is clean but I have to be careful here because I am a government employee. I will say that I am really against unfair or corrupt hiring practices in Ottawa ( the city, where many of us work in government) and I think I can say that corruption has existed and the popular record would show that(corrupt hiring) on a high public record level whereas the low level clerks like myself would pass unnoticed because privacy laws would protect our employment records. But if it did exist would offend me. You can say you want "fair laws" and that is I think universal between all cultures. But to place Canada in a list with Pakistan is is not right given Pakistan is only recently moved out of most corrupt country status and the joke in Pakistan is apparently they can't even get that right now. a thorny issue I better go check what Lessig is saying but if I come back and say "oh another American pointing out how bad the rest of the world is" then my point will only be stronger. Just because the web makes things world wide does not make all issues global. Peter Timusk, B.Math statistics (2002), B.A. legal studies (2006) Carleton University Systems Science Graduate student, University of Ottawa. just trying to stay linear. Read by hundreds of lurkers every week. On 9-Oct-07, at 6:54 PM, Margie Borschke wrote:
On 10/10/2007, at 6:34 AM, air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org wrote:
For instance we don't have the same background of libertarianism in Canada. We like our good government, peace and order.
Nice use of the 1960s cultural myth of Canada. The liberal party lost hold of government in the last election because of a corruption scandal. Money has a huge, often corrupting influence on politics in most countries. Canada is no exception.
It sounds to me like at the moment he's focussing on corruption of the US democratic system by big business rather than pointing out problems in other countries. His point that we can't achieve a balanced IP system (or for that matter tackle problems like climate change) until we address the problem of corporate influence on policy making is a very good one. He's recently shifted his wording from 'corruption' to the need for 'independent' government, which clarifies the argument a bit (http://lessig.org/blog/2007/09/disclosure_statement_20_the_in.html). Lisa ___________________________________________________________ Lisa Horner Global Partners and Associates 4th Floor Holborn Gate, 26 Southampton Buildings, London, WC2A 1AH Office: + 44 207 861 3960 Mobile: +44 7867 795859 lisa@global-partners.co.uk http://www.global-partners.co.uk / http://freedomofexpression.org.uk -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Peter Timusk Sent: 10 October 2007 03:01 To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: [Air-L] gov. corruption issues Re: Air-L Digest, Vol 39, Issue 10 I think you are confusing my points about legal culture with the corruption issues and I wasn't saying anything about corruption really sorry if that wasn't clear. I will possibly approach Lessig with an open mind for his new issue. I really wasn't trying to say that Canada is clean but I have to be careful here because I am a government employee. I will say that I am really against unfair or corrupt hiring practices in Ottawa ( the city, where many of us work in government) and I think I can say that corruption has existed and the popular record would show that(corrupt hiring) on a high public record level whereas the low level clerks like myself would pass unnoticed because privacy laws would protect our employment records. But if it did exist would offend me. You can say you want "fair laws" and that is I think universal between all cultures. But to place Canada in a list with Pakistan is is not right given Pakistan is only recently moved out of most corrupt country status and the joke in Pakistan is apparently they can't even get that right now. a thorny issue I better go check what Lessig is saying but if I come back and say "oh another American pointing out how bad the rest of the world is" then my point will only be stronger. Just because the web makes things world wide does not make all issues global. Peter Timusk, B.Math statistics (2002), B.A. legal studies (2006) Carleton University Systems Science Graduate student, University of Ottawa. just trying to stay linear. Read by hundreds of lurkers every week. On 9-Oct-07, at 6:54 PM, Margie Borschke wrote:
On 10/10/2007, at 6:34 AM, air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org wrote:
For instance we don't have the same background of libertarianism in Canada. We like our good government, peace and order.
Nice use of the 1960s cultural myth of Canada. The liberal party lost hold of government in the last election because of a corruption scandal. Money has a huge, often corrupting influence on politics in most countries. Canada is no exception.
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Peter Timusk wrote: ::a thorny issue I better go check what Lessig is saying but if I come ::back and say "oh another American pointing out how bad the rest of ::the world is" then my point will only be stronger. Just because the ::web makes things world wide does not make all issues global. Thorny? Really? If you come back and say "oh another American pointing out how bad the rest of the world is" your point will not be stronger. It will still be just as boring as before, and about as useful as me saying "oh another non-American pointing out how bad America is." Look, quite frankly, taking potshots at America is taking potshots at the broad side of a barn. It's easy to hit and it's probably satisfying (because you just hit something), but it's intellectually lazy. There are a lot of interesting and relevant aspects to any ecosystem (intellectual, physical, natural, legal or other) that play off of each other in infintely complex ways. Saying America sucks is an easy out because you don't have to work for it. Appreciating IP issues for how they actually work at home, abroad, and between the two is a lot harder. There are some people on this list who have made interesting and useful observations. Why not think about them and come up with an *actual* rejoinder to IP law, instead of one to a straw man? -Alexis
participants (4)
-
Alexis Turner -
Lisa Horner -
Margie Borschke -
Peter Timusk