Noam Chomsky on Intellectual Property

Author: Savant
Socialism
chomsky
copyright

Posts

Total: 6
Topic's author
#1
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 2,104
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
Noam Chomsky is radically opposed to the concept of intellectual property:

"There’s a name for [intellectual property] in economic history. Friedrich List, famous German political economist in the 19th century, who was actually borrowing from Andrew Hamilton, called it “kicking away the ladder”. First you use state power and violence to develop, then you kick away those procedures so that other people can’t do it." - Chomsky

That seems like a very clear stance. But now let's see how Mr. Chomsky feels about his intellectual property:

Material on this site is copyrighted by Noam Chomsky and/or Noam Chomsky and his collaborators (with the exception of any third-party material used here by permission, copyright by the respective authors).

Copyright © Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky 1988 Introduction © Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky 2002 Afterword © Edward S. Herman 2008 Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman have asserted their right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 to be identified as the authors of this work

Copyright © 2017 by L. Valeria-Galvao-Wasserman-Chomsky

I'll give Chomsky supporters a chance to come to his defense here, but his position seems wildly inconsistent.
#2
n8nrgim
n8nrgim's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,042
3
2
5
n8nrgim's avatar
n8nrgim
3
2
5
-->
@Savant
he might just be playing by the rules as they are. kind of like when a rich person thinks taxes should go up on the rich, but they dont voluntarily donate to the government when taxes aren't increases as they'd like. 
Topic's author
#3
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 2,104
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@n8nrgim
playing by the rules as they are
There's no rule that says Chomsky has to copyright anything. He's a millionaire who can definitely afford to give his books for free. He's also compared corporations to slave owners—based on his view of society, it would be more like criticizing slavery while owning slaves, not simply wanting higher taxes. He doesn't just criticize capitalism, he criticizes participation in capitalism as well, which includes him.

a rich person who thinks taxes should go up on the rich
That does actually seem a bit illogical. If someone in the middle class thinks that taxes should go up for everyone in exchange for more public services, then they're expecting something in return. But rich people who think the rich have too much money can just give it away.
#4
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,075
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@Savant
Who doesnt wish there were so many hydrogen weapons on Earth? If humanity could get their act together, no such bombs would be built on Earth.

For that matter, wouldnt it be nice if there were no pistols or guns on Earth. Gun free zone.

Meanwhile we have nations and people with weapons so, it is only fair that each every person have access to such weapons.

Ive always been a proponet of personal reasonable gun rights, since we have authorities and military with guns.

So I understand the espousing an ideal concept for this or that, while at same time, using the current standards as just  everyone else does.

..." There were 3 billion people in the world in 1960.
...In less than three decades, the population surpassed 5 billion in 1987.
.....Today, another three decades later, there are around 7.5 billion people in the world.
......Since 1975, the global population has grown by one billion about every 12 years."...

If people dont see the problems from this above, then they ignorant { lacking education }, in denial or mentally handi-capped { ex those who create false narrative for significant issues facing humanity }.
Topic's author
#5
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 2,104
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@ebuc
In some situations, it is not hypocritical to criticize a system while participating in it. But this is not one of those situations. The fact that other people are copyrighting materials does not make it such that Chomsky must do the same. It would be easy for him to put his works in the public domain. Chomsky equates the protection of intellectual property to "kicking down the ladder" and has criticized corporations for doing so. Judging by these statements, he thinks that ideas are owned by the public and that copyrighting information is itself an immoral thing to do. I'm not saying that Chomsky's actions are inconsistent with criticism of capitalism. I'm saying that his actions are inconsistent with these specific views, which he has repeatedly espoused. Essentially, Chomsky is saying that "doing x, y, and z is immoral," while doing x, y, and z. I don't think I'm being unfair by calling him out on this.

#6
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,075
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@Savant
You would understand better than me. Thanks for thoughts