Blog post 6

David Parry's talk on copyright had some strong suggestions about how we as consumers can change in order to promote the free sharing of intellectual property. In the video, he talks about copyright infringement, the concept of intellectual property and the business of "owning" information.  He refers to this conflict as "open scholarship," whether we should freely and openly share information and academic research. At the same time, we will be eliminating the profitable side of information which prevents some readers from having access to the information.  His ten steps to ending "Knowledge Cartels" gives a few valid reasons on why we should give up the monetary aspect of information and simply share everything.  His steps include giving every new piece of work a creative commons license, refuse to work for the gated publishers and simply pirate everything.  He does make a reference to the criticism he receives, most critics may label him as an information anarchist.  I can understand why they would lump him in with the rest of the chaos that ensues when society decides to simply share everything.  Parry's theory could definitely work but it would take a lot of lobbying to convince every creator to give up the money-making rights to their works.  Could we collectively eliminate the concept of intellectual property? Suddenly sharing what was once a form of wealth would be difficult for Western society.  Information has been a traded commodity for hundreds of years, when the thoughts of one person seemed to hold enough value to change the state of his pockets.  As it grew, the economy of information became more and more valuable.  Science, innovation, and the exploration of ourselves as humans helped boost the emergence of copyright law.  As society grew, specialization allowed for more information to be produced and distributed, while providing income for a range of professionals in the intellectual property business itself. I find it hard to believe that we can successfully and mutually share information in way that everyone can gain from it, while those who previously profited from it are left with the same rights as everyone else but without a livelihood.  Although I agree with some of the reasons for suggesting these changes, the changes themselves seem far from our reach as a culture and do not seem reasonable.