[pp.int.general] Correct word usage for PP.

[Maike Marrek]

Richard Stallman schrieb:
> The term "digital goods" shares a drawback with all other terminology
> taken from economics: it directs people to think in terms of economics
> rather than in terms of human rights.

IMO it's not a problem to think in economic terms, the problem is the 
economic concept of homo economicus. It's not a secret, that the 
concepts' assumptions are definitely failing in a connected (and 
unfortunately widely observed) world. It's a question of time, that this 
concept will be replaced. There are already many discussions everywhere 
around different economic faculties and there could be a shift coming 
towards economics. But there's still a slip-proof new and widely 
accepted term missing ... including human beings, connected & 
interacting without solely financial interests. Maslow's hierarchy of 
needs shows many fields and possibilities to expand current concepts - 
according to reality.

> I call them "published works".  Everyone will understand that term,
> which is much older and predates the tendency to look at life in terms
> of economics.

I didn't recognised the url/title, there are lots of implications worth 
to work on. At least in Germany there's currently a "published work" of 
one of your US-colleagues discussed in philosophy and IT loving circles. 
This work is supported by a great and powerful "chain of experts" and 
his "theses" mark one end of the public discourse. There's a urgent need 
of real experts, who are willing to get in dialogue.

But I get the smart idea of "published/unpublished", which introduces 
privacy as a "value" ;-).

> As for "virtual assets", that is not equivalent to those other too.
> Its meaning is totally different.

Have to stop here, real life is calling and I've to think about your 
following points and meaning/implications of "virtual assets", specially 
regarding language barriers (for example I can't remember having ever 
heard of "bads" in contrast to goods=Güter in economic education).

> 
> For instance, a digital audio recording that we might have a copy of
> could be called a "digital good", though I would prefer to call it
> a "published work".
> 
> The copyright on that recording might be a "virtual asset",
> but the recording itself is probably not one.
> 
> The copyright is not the same thing as the work.  Identifying them
> tends to lead people to believe that copyright policy is inherent in
> the works and cannot be changed.  That is the opposite of what we say.
> For us to identify copyrights and works is self-defeating.
> 
> Another problem with "virtual asset" is that it lumps together
> copyrights, patents, trademarks, and various other legal privileges.
> That is self-defeating.  We need to teach people to see them as
> separate issues.
> 
> "Virtual asset" also has the drawback of leaning towards economics.
> 


-- 
a one-armed man comes into a flower shop and says
what flower expresses
days go by and it just keeps going by
endlessly pulling you into the future
days go by, endlessly
endlessly pulling you into the future

and the florist says: the white lilly.

Laurie Anderson - Home of Brave