[pp.int.general] copyright vs. "droit d'auteur"

[Reinier Bakels]

>> I am also involved in the software patents struggle, and the opponents of 
>> software patents often use very weak and questionable human rights 
>> arguments.
> Then encourage them to use strong and almost unquestionable human rights 
> arguments.
>> Well, some of you may say: "Then try harder". But is it helpful to try 
>> harder if you are in a dead-end street?
> Actually, you are assuming that would be a dead-end street, and I then 
> disagree: as long as human rights are essential, I firmly believe that 
> defending what is essential for us

The alternative is obvious: better use convincing arguments not based on 
human rights than not convincing arguments based on human rights (if the 
ideal combination - convincing arguments based on human rights - is not 
available). There are actually plenty of those (at least in the case of 
software patents).Politicians preferablely use arguments from society, not 
from law.

It is actually quite common that non-lawyers make the mistake of using legal 
arguments. If you go to an attorney, you should ask him to help you to get 
your money back, not to prosecute someone for tort. Using legal arguments 
inm politics redoubles the legal side and neglects the "real", social side.

reinier