10.08.2012: Xavier Naidoo ... and intellectual property

Today, Germanys highest court, the Bundesgerichtshof expressed a sentence [1] that a downloader of a piece of music shall be made trackable (by IP, name, and address) by the Internet provider against the owner of the carrier of the intellectual property (IP), thus any irregular usage of the material can be punished.

While compiling the material for my book about Qmail [2], I did some research about the (ab)use and implications of intellectual property, which I expressed even further on a discussion list [3].

In short: We have to ask, who is originator of a (new) thought, music theme, picture, design pattern (you can add more samples) which is protected by a trademark (I call this an abstracta). We secondly have to ask, under which conditions this abstracta can be used. As a third aspect, we may ask, who is entitled to distribute (in public) any of those abstracta.

Of course, a forth thought might be, whether it is allowed to distribute modified copies of the abstracta.

Clearly, the Internet allows an unrestricted copy of any abstracta, by means of upload and download. Consider a picture: In the old days a picture is shot a camera (lets say an Olympus OM-10). The negative needs to be processed by chemicals. It needed to get printed. It could be scanned and published. However, the negative (on Kodak, Agfa, Fuji, or HP film) is the only original. Taking digital photos with my Nikon today, and sending the file to someone else, it is an exact copy; it is indistinguishable -- no physical representative exists, carrying uniqueness.

Now the problem occurs: Is it allowed to make anybody else abstracta available on the Internet (even though I paid for the usage) ? Essentially, it brakes up the pay cycle, the privacy cycle, and the purported usage cycle ! The latter is the subject of Whistleblowers.


[1] medien-internet-und-recht.de/volltext.php?mir_dok_id=2416
[2] www.fehcom.de/qmail/qmailbook.html
[3] www.ecb.int/ecb/html/index.en.html