[pp.int.general] purpose of manifesto

[Reinier Bakels]

> Though I think you already asked this question, just to clarify your 
> point: are you comparing cultural works with material properties? Also, if 
> we achieve to change the commercial rights term & scope, would you 
> consider those rights -when applied to works created *after* such legal 
> change (very important: I'm not talking about current works, Reinier, but 
> future, post-change works)- as /property/ rights?

Yes, somehow we discussed this before. I first contended that property 
rights are "set in stone" once granted, but RMS gave counter-examples that 
questioned this idea. The underlying principle is that a government must be 
reliable. If and when it grants rights (or "recognises natural rights", for 
those who like that concept - not you, I gather), the rights owners must be 
able to depend on it. For a very simple reason: in order to allow rights to 
be subject of trade, they should not be allowed to be withdrawn or 
"disappear", at least not without due compensation. If I sell something, the 
buyer should know that it does not lose its value because of *legal* reasons 
(e.g. expropriation without compensation). This applies to all rights that 
represent a monetary value (... else there would be no trade).

In this context it is irrelevant and confusing to distinguish material from 
immaterial objects. Obligations are also rights, and they are also 
immaterial. If I promise you to write an, uh, let's say manifesto, it is an 
obligation. Some obligations (like the obligation to pay a sum of money) can 
be traded. Firms may sell portfolios of debtor claims to banks. As I 
explained before, this is basically 2000 year old Roman law.

For PP politics, the (prime) question is whether/when "commodification" of 
information (enabling it to become an object of trade) is appropriate. 
"Commodification" is a political concept, even related with Marxism. While 
Marxists rejected many forms of commodification, there are forms most people 
immediately agree on, like the commodification of LOVE.