OSNews

Hey, this is another good heartfelt article that was a pleasure to read on this topic. I agree wholeheartedly with the author on this stance and perspective on the way things are happening in the world today.

There is one thing which came to mind as a result of reading about the Microsoft Word format lock-down.

If I create a document, everything that I put into that document I could claim is my own intellectual propery. It is my copyrighted material. All the images I create, all the text I write, all the borders and layout that I choose, it's all my creation. I can own it if I so choose.

Now, if I own that content, and I save it as a Microsoft Word file, supposedly I am not permitted to access that content without someone else's permission.

Is it just me, or is it OBVIOUS that the two licenses clash completely? How can I have a license which says that I own the content, while at the same time Microsoft through their Word format is saying that they own it? We end up with a situation where the two parties are claiming ownership.

I am saying to Microsoft that the content I create is my own and they may not use it. Microsoft is saying back that since the content is stored in one of their file formats, they own it. Ownership means posession of access rights. When Microsoft prevents me from accessing the word document in any way they are claiming ownership of the document content, are they not? I know, they aren't forbidding access to the document, just not access to a description of how the document is stored. In other words, they will have taken something that is mine, confiscated it and emprisoned it, allowing me only to have access to it if I have the right key.

If I create content and claim ownership of it, posession is mine, and access to it for me should be absolutely open. Yes, I could access it openly and freely, if I only knew how. Surely, by Microsoft owning the know-how, they are in effect preventing access? If I can only access the content properly by using their Word software, and I don't want to use that software, then my access to that file is hindered and limited. Surely this is against my copyright.

I think the moral of this story, overall, is that when ANYONE claims ownership over ANY part of the world in which we live and create, it causes problems for someone else. When any TWO people claim ownership over access to the same part of the world - ie content in a document, there is a tug of ware and a stalemate.

If everyone decided to a) not own the content they create and b) not restrict access to the format that the content is stored in ... ie if nobody get's into the ownership business at all, then we would all be better of.

My point is, it's one thing to wish that others do not place ownership on a standard or a file format, but by the same token we must also relinquish ownership of everything we create or store using those techniques.

Freedom means freedom for all, after all.