<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
On 15.12.11 01:18, Paul Lehto wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAD=1OvdJ8Ac_NFohzDh9Wugj20uOj0KE41NQ4h9++U3h0sp_=g@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">It
seems the issue lies here. Implying legal right to ownership
of physical goods (especially is immovable) might be said to
be inevitably tied with the property laws of some country. But
what about the legal rights to ownership of intellectual
property? <br>
</blockquote>
<div class="im"><br>
Intellectual property, being mobile pushes the envelope of
international law, in the name of preventing copycats in
foreign countries. Some copying, as i see it, is legitimate
(life-saving drugs) while some other copying is not. <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Legitimate?<br>
<br>
How legitimate it would be, if it causes loss of business for a
major US corporation with strong lobby at the Government?<br>
<br>
If you say it is legitimate, would the US permit import of these
life saving drugs from some other country. Why not?<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAD=1OvdJ8Ac_NFohzDh9Wugj20uOj0KE41NQ4h9++U3h0sp_=g@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote"><br>
<div>
But, Ivar, given the way you word the following, it is
impossible to disagree: "[[...laws that] impact individuals <b>wholly
outside</b> of the US government's <b>legitimate</b> sphere
of political power." (emphasis added) The question is, what
is the "legitimate" sphere? Probably I would agree with most
or all examples anyone here might give. <br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
As I see it, SOPA is primarily impacting the US citizens. As it has
happened before, the US Government will have to back off. The damage
to the US reputation will be already done.<br>
<br>
Remember the times, when Apple Computer introduced the first
personal computers with the PowerPC G4 chip? That was the first mass
produced microprocessor to pass the "gigaflop per second barrier",
that put it in the "supercomputer" category, therefore subject to US
export control and "dual use" regulations.<br>
Who lost? Apple Computer, a respected US Corporation, because for
few months, until the "law was adjusted" it was prohibited to sell
these desktop computers outside the US.<br>
<br>
Remember the "strong" cryptography madness? Where browsers produced
in the US could not be exported if they had more than 40 bit
ciphers. <br>
Who lost? Millions of Internet users, who for lack of knowledge were
exposed to weak cryptography. Also, US corporations, for lost
business, because stronger cryptography was available everywhere at
that time. <br>
<br>
The same applies for cryptography/security enabled software in
various operating systems, routers etc. These were prohibited for
shipment to anywhere outside the US. Even if it was pretty obvious
that: algorithms were published and available and implemented
everywhere, software was readily available from various other
vendors that resided outside of the US, such as in Europe, that
implemented the same or better security technology.<br>
Only when sufficient number of US companies realized they are facing
massive loss of market worldwide, did the US Government abandon this
regulation.<br>
<br>
You can only regulate something, if you understand it.<br>
<br>
<br>
By the way, it is like allowing a person who does not know how to
pilot, to sit at the cockpit of an airplane full of people. This is
what we observe recently with all these regulations.<br>
<br>
Daniel<br>
</body>
</html>