Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Per SÃ¸vik" data-source="post: 116256" data-attributes="member: 1285">Re: Copyright, Patent, General Intellectual Property DiscussionSince you brought up the Nascar analogy, in a way I&#039;d say that Dale Earnhardt sr. IMO illustrated the difference between what you can get away with under a judicial system and what is right, fair, within the spirit of the rules etc. &quot;The Intimidator&quot; put a lot of drivers in the wall during his carreer, using moves that were deliberate, mean in my opinion and not really within the spirit of the rules. Allthough what he did was considered by many to be wrong, he got away with it most of the time. Of course Karma sorted him out in a big way in the end, but that is beside the point. However, those who were victims of his rough tactics would still feel wronged and hold some resentment even if he was cleared by the race stewards, and most other drivers would not rise to his level of intimidation in their driving even if the rules and the judicial system seemingly allowed them to do so. Why, because they believed it was wrong and dangerous.I believe, and am strongly opposed to Charlie McGee in this respect, that most sportspeople, business people and private persons should observe ethics in what they choose to do, and not win or profit at all costs &quot;as long as you can get away with it&quot;. This is why companies state that they will conduct business in an ethical manner, sports people have fair play, and us private people are brought up being taught ethical guidelines and most of use never read a single page in a law book.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Per SÃ¸vik, post: 116256, member: 1285"] Re: Copyright, Patent, General Intellectual Property Discussion Since you brought up the Nascar analogy, in a way I'd say that Dale Earnhardt sr. IMO illustrated the difference between what you can get away with under a judicial system and what is right, fair, within the spirit of the rules etc. "The Intimidator" put a lot of drivers in the wall during his carreer, using moves that were deliberate, mean in my opinion and not really within the spirit of the rules. Allthough what he did was considered by many to be wrong, he got away with it most of the time. Of course Karma sorted him out in a big way in the end, but that is beside the point. However, those who were victims of his rough tactics would still feel wronged and hold some resentment even if he was cleared by the race stewards, and most other drivers would not rise to his level of intimidation in their driving even if the rules and the judicial system seemingly allowed them to do so. Why, because they believed it was wrong and dangerous. I believe, and am strongly opposed to Charlie McGee in this respect, that most sportspeople, business people and private persons should observe ethics in what they choose to do, and not win or profit at all costs "as long as you can get away with it". This is why companies state that they will conduct business in an ethical manner, sports people have fair play, and us private people are brought up being taught ethical guidelines and most of use never read a single page in a law book. [/QUOTE]

Verification