|
|
Helen Nissenbaum
I have suggested that Johnson’s characterizing the existing system of software laws as relatively just is no more accurate than characterizing a system of laws relatively just that did not discriminate between killing in self-defense, and murder. Why? Because there are good reasons for viewing casual copying as morally justified copying, having to do with the enhancement of important social values. While I do not question the moral basis for private ownership of software, I propose that we extend the base from which we deduce the bundle of rights that are properly accorded to software owners. In particular, in the case of casual copying, because it is done in fulfillment of perceived obligations to help, or to act responsibly to the needs of others close by, and because it does not significantly threaten the underlying goals of intellectual ownership, it should not be outlawed. Princeton University Go to: The Ownership of Ideas in Computer Software – Snapper Home > Research Resources > Software Ownership & Intellectual Property Rights > A Plea for Casual Copying |
||
|
HOME | IN
THE NEWS | RESEARCH RESOURCES The Research Center on Computing & Society |