For comment, three discussion articles

Dear friends,

Korakora.org is revitalizing the Kuro meetings and will begin with on-line exchanges of ideas via a new sub-heading "Kuro't Palaisipán." For comment, we have three discussion articles:

(1) Statement on the Philippine IP policy and strategy
(2) So What's the problem?
(3) Is there anything left after property rights?

Abstracts and links below.

If you have a paper, short article, draft statements or other research document that you would like to place in a discussion-study group, just let me know.

Mabuhay!
Fatima Lasay

Kuro't Palaisipán An informal study group investigating the manifestations of a global mental malaise, in particular the exploitation, monetization and criminalization of thinking.

=======
Abstracts:
=======

(1) Abstract: Statement on the Philippine IP policy and strategy

This draft statement is the result of a forum on the Philippine government's "National Intellectual Property Policy and Strategy" (NIPPS) organized by the Third World Network. This draft statement gives an overview of key principles in NIPPS, in particular, the IP Value Chain and the Economic Incentive. Afterwards, arguments are made through an assessment of these key principles against social and economic realities. In conclusion, the draft statement makes a challenge to the IP Philippines on its responsibility as a public institution.

If you have read the Philippine government's "National Intellectual Property Policy and Strategy" (NIPPS), we especially encourage you to comment on this draft statement.

See http://korakora.org/kuro/2009/08/statement-on-philippine-ip-policy-and-s...

(2) Abstract: So What's The Problem?

This paper begins with the suggestion that "think tanks", "study groups" and similar groups consider very carefully the name and scope of the subject covered by their research, in particular, the definition of the problem covered: How one defines the problem generally defines the solutions that tend to emerge as a result of the original definition of the problem. Because so many contemporary problems are closely related, one needs a definition that will enable a creative and open exploration of the various issues involved.

In "So What's The Problem?", the term "Intellectual Property" is taken as one example. Termed this way, the concept remains fairly limited, but reconceptualised as "Immaterial Property", the concept leads to a wider range of inter-related cultural and economic problem areas which are also related to the immateriality so often found in connection with digital technology. These are thus likely to help explain the current emphasis on "Intellectual Property Rights" found in some quarters. Without this wider perspective, the task of understanding the problem becomes more difficult and our solutions likely to be less effective.

This paper then proceeds to raise caution on problems created by abstract conceptualisations, as these reflect deeply embedded cultural biases that are themselves extremely problematic. The cultural and political significance of these biases are then pointed out, beginning with Western culture and its roots in Christian interpretations of Greek pagan culture.

"So What's The Problem?" discusses several areas where a path to a "Network of Problems" often proves most difficult: the global tendency to focus on the "information economy" divorced from the "processing machine"; the dematerialisation of the economy, and the rise of the industrialisation process. What is needed, this paper argues, is a path that will create the perspectives enabling us to integrate such apparent opposites as "theory" and "practice" or the "conceptual" and the "physical" and yet still help us to see clearly both the wood and the trees; in other words, the ability to counter the limitations of our own prejudices.

See http://korakora.org/kuro/2009/08/so-whats-the-problem/

(3) Abstract: Is there anything left after property rights?

This article begins with the emotive statement, "All Property is theft and Intellectual Property is Intellectual Theft!", and builds a case against global property rights enforcement by setting the property regime's economic rationale against local democracies and social and cultural self-determination. Snippets are taken from history of property and Indian land rights, the environmental and agricultural destruction of California before the 1960s, to the present terrorizing acts of the global free market system.

In conclusion, the playful textual intersections in "Is there anything left after property rights?" is given its emotive release in the quote: "Sometimes it is necessary for men to scream against a world they never made, and cannot control."

See http://korakora.org/kuro/2009/08/is-there-anything-left-after-property-r...