Skip to main content

View Diary: Yoga can be patented? (39 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Wow... (0+ / 0-)

    that's what's known as a "true-true-unrelated" argument.

    Beethoven was paid handsomely for his work. As were most of the other famous composers you know from that era. They had sponsors who were rich and often noble. All of the writers of classical literature were paid. Of course, there were the poor shlubs like Van Gogh who didn't cash in because their genius wasn't recognized until after their deaths, but that didn't mean they weren't trying to get paid.

    I'm not a huge Wiki fan, but it actually has a good article on the history of copyright. And, clearly, the issue is one of financial control of a work.

    The fact that yoga was developed without "IP" rights is about as unrelated a fact as you can get. Are you therefore suggesting that all yoga videos should be not copyright, and therefore should be public domain? How does that provide incentive for someone to make a better video and profit both themselves and the yoga-video-watching community? What about yoga classes at the Y? Are we supposed to not have to pay for the teacher's time because the system was developed "without IP"? Sorry, but your logic really escapes me on this.

    I know you have this hard-on for the RIAA/MPAA, but honestly, these arguments don't really advance your cause at all.

    The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it -- GB Shaw

    by kmiddle on Mon May 07, 2007 at 05:13:54 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Yoga itself has become popular (0+ / 0-)

      because of its nature as an exercise trend. Anyone can make yoga videos doing the same thing. Why should there be a copyright given to a person who performs tasks that are thousands of years old? It's like how Monsanto tried patenting 1,000+ year old Iraqi seeds.
      Because of the popularity of yoga, as long as someone is selling yoga tapes, they'll still make a lot of money from sales no matter what.

      I'm not necessarily suggesting that we abolish all IP laws (I'd rather not go back to the patronage system) but the restrictiveness that they have taken on in recent decades needs to be massively rolled back. For example, I would start by prohibiting the patenting of DNA and other lifeforms. I would also limit the maximum length in which a work can be copyrighted to 50-55 years. Copyright is not meant to be passed on to the great-grandchildren of the original creator like a physical estate or an heirloom such as a necklace or ring.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site