DOCSLIB.ORG

Nuevas Formas De Valorización Del Conocimiento En El Esquema De Realización De Ganancia Del Capital

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nuevas Formas De Valorización Del Conocimiento En El Esquema De Realización De Ganancia Del Capital FACULTAD LATINOAMERICANA DE CIENCIAS SOCIALES SEDE ACADÉMICA MÉXICO MAESTRÍA EN CIENCIAS SOCIALES XVII PROMOCIÓN 2008-2010 Nuevas formas de valorización del conocimiento en el esquema de realización de ganancia del capital. Caso: Asociación Mexicana Empresarial del Software Libre Tesis que para obtener el grado de Maestro en Ciencias Sociales Presenta: Alfonso Cano Robles Director de tesis: Dra. Úrsula Zurita Rivera Seminario de tesis: Economía y Sociedad del Conocimiento México, D. F. Agosto de 2010 Este posgrado fue cursado gracias a una beca otorgada por el Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (CONACYT) del Gobierno de México FACULTAD LATINOAMERICANA DE CIENCIAS SOCIALES SEDE ACADÉMICA MÉXICO MAESTRÍA EN CIENCIAS SOCIALES XVII PROMOCIÓN 2008 – 2010 Título de tesis Nuevas formas de valorización del conocimiento en el esquema de realización de ganancia del capital. Caso: Asociación Mexicana Empresarial del Software Libre Tesis que para obtener el grado de Maestro en Ciencias Sociales Presenta: Alfonso Cano Robles Director de tesis: Dra. Úrsula Zurita Rivera Seminario de tesis Economía y Sociedad del Conocimiento México, D. F. Agosto de 2010 Índice de contenido Índice de contenido Introducción...........................................................................................................1 1. El contexto problemático...............................................................................2 a. El software en México y su contexto internacional...................................2 b. Los estudios del software libre................................................................12 2. Fundamentos epistémicos, teóricos y metodológicos................................17 3. Delimitación del objeto de estudio..............................................................22 a. Unidades de análisis...............................................................................22 4. Justificación del objeto de estudio y definición del problema.....................23 5. Preguntas de investigación.........................................................................23 6. Objetivo general de investigación...............................................................23 7. Objetivos Específicos..................................................................................24 8. Hipótesis......................................................................................................24 9. Evidencia empírica......................................................................................24 10. Sobre la estructura de los capítulos y el anexo........................................26 Capítulo I:Contexto y conceptualización desde el presente de la sociedad capitalista del conocimiento.................................................................................28 1. El software libre como una nueva forma de producción y valorización de conocimiento...................................................................................................29 a. El software libre emerge.........................................................................29 b. Open source software.............................................................................33 c. Los empresarios del software libre.........................................................35 2. Para pensar el software libre: conceptualización de la relación conocimiento y valorización en la historicidad del capitalismo.......................36 a. El conocimiento en las distintas relaciones de producción en su paradigma clásico.......................................................................................37 b. Cambios de paradigma en la producción: el ascenso del conocimiento como principal fuente de valor....................................................................39 c. Reconfiguración en la relación conocimiento-valorización dados nuevos ii Índice de contenido medios técnicos..........................................................................................41 3. La apropiación del conocimiento en la sociedad capitalista global y las implicaciones para el software libre................................................................45 a. Una conceptualización dialéctica del conocimiento...............................46 b. Valorización y apropiación privada del conocimiento.............................49 c. Conceptualización del “bien club” llamado software libre.......................51 d. Las empresas del software son intensivas en conocimiento.................56 Conclusiones...................................................................................................57 Capítulo II:Emerge y se potencializa la forma de producción del software libre 65 1. Antecedentes: la construcción de una industria..........................................66 2. Emerge la metodología de hacer software libre en el marco de la sociedad capitalista del conocimiento............................................................................70 a. El movimiento de Berkeley y el surgimiento de una nueva metodología de desarrollo del software...........................................................................70 b. El desarrollo del kernel Linux: la potencialización de una metodología de desarrollo.....................................................................................................73 c. Los avances técnicos: la estructura modular y el “version control system”........................................................................................................76 3. Conceptualización de la producción: para distinguir motivaciones de prácticas sociales............................................................................................81 a. Sistematización de la estructura de producción.....................................82 b. Las motivaciones....................................................................................85 c. La práctica del software libre..................................................................89 Conclusiones...................................................................................................93 Capítulo III:Valorización del conocimiento y realización de ganancia en dos modelos producción del software........................................................................98 1. Modelo de valorización en la empresa de software privado.....................101 a. Creación estandarizada y jerárquica del software................................102 i. Estandarización: la institucionalización del desarrollo del software..102 ii. La jerarquía al interior del desarrollo del software............................103 iii. Abstracción de los pasos para valorizar software y su modelo de iii Índice de contenido realización de ganancia........................................................................106 b. Estrategias de realización de ganancia................................................108 i. Reproducción de los monopolios del software..................................110 ii. El lock-in tecnológico.........................................................................113 iii. EEE: Adoptar, extender y extinguir...................................................114 c. Caso: Microsoft......................................................................................115 i. Principios y modelos de valorización del conocimiento: Microsoft Solution Framework..............................................................................117 ii. Estrategias de realización de ganancia de Microsoft: Monopolio, lock- in y EEE.................................................................................................119 2. Modelo de valorización del software libre.................................................122 a. Valorización del conocimiento...............................................................123 b. Principios y modelos de realización de ganancia alrededor del software libre............................................................................................................125 i. Vendedor único de fuente abierta......................................................126 ii. Servicio/Soporte de fuente abierta....................................................128 c. El software libre es una estrategia........................................................129 d. Casos....................................................................................................134 i. IBM.....................................................................................................134 ii. Red Hat.............................................................................................136 iii. Novell................................................................................................138 Conclusiones.................................................................................................140 Capítulo IV:Análisis de la valorización del conocimiento y la realización de ganancia en el caso de la AMESOL..................................................................144 1. La AMESOL desde, por y para sus miembros..........................................146 a. Contexto: el software en México desde los 80 y su repercusión en el presente....................................................................................................146 b. PROSOFT.............................................................................................152 c. Contingencias para el surgimiento de la AMESOL...............................156 d. Constitución de un organismo intermedio............................................159
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Open Source Projects As Incubators of Innovation
    RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS TO ORGANIZATIONAL SOCIOLOGY AND INNOVATION STUDIES / STUTTGARTER BEITRÄGE ZUR ORGANISATIONS- UND INNOVATIONSSOZIOLOGIE SOI Discussion Paper 2017-03 Open Source Projects as Incubators of Innovation From Niche Phenomenon to Integral Part of the Software Industry Jan-Felix Schrape Institute for Social Sciences Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies Jan-Felix Schrape Open Source Projects as Incubators of Innovation. From Niche Phenomenon to Integral Part of the Software Industry. SOI Discussion Paper 2017-03 University of Stuttgart Institute for Social Sciences Department of Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies Seidenstr. 36 D-70174 Stuttgart Editor Prof. Dr. Ulrich Dolata Tel.: +49 711 / 685-81001 [email protected] Managing Editor Dr. Jan-Felix Schrape Tel.: +49 711 / 685-81004 [email protected] Research Contributions to Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies Discussion Paper 2017-03 (May 2017) ISSN 2191-4990 © 2017 by the author(s) Jan-Felix Schrape is senior researcher at the Department of Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies, University of Stuttgart (Germany). [email protected] Additional downloads from the Department of Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies at the Institute for Social Sciences (University of Stuttgart) are filed under: http://www.uni-stuttgart.de/soz/oi/publikationen/ Abstract Over the last 20 years, open source development has become an integral part of the software industry and a key component of the innovation strategies of all major IT providers. Against this backdrop, this paper seeks to develop a systematic overview of open source communities and their socio-economic contexts. I begin with a recon- struction of the genesis of open source software projects and their changing relation- ships to established IT companies.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Exam Review History of Science 150
    Final Exam Review History of Science 150 1. Format of the Exam 90 minutes, on canvas 12:25pm December 18. You are welcome to bring notes to the exam, so you could start by filling out this sheet with notes from lectures and the readings! Like the mid-term, the final exam will have two kinds of questions. 1) Multiple choice questions examining your knowledge of key concepts, terms, historical developments, and contexts 2) Short answer questions in which ask you to draw on things you’ve learned in the course (from lecture, readings, videos) to craft a short argument in a brief essay expressing your informed issue on a historical question 2. Sample Questions Multiple Choice: Mina Rees was involved in (and wrote about) which of the following computing projects? A) Silicon Valley start-ups in the dot-com period B) Charles Babbage’s Difference Engine C) Works Projects Administration Tables Project D) Federal funding for computing research after WWII Short Answer: (Your answers should be between 100-200 words, and keep to specifics (events, machines, developments, people) that demonstrate your knowledge of materials covered from the course) A) What are two historical factors important to the development of Silicon Valley’s technology industry after World War II? B) In what ways did the field of programming change (in terms of its status and workers) between World War II and the late 1960s? 3. Topics to Review: Below, is a list of ideas to review for the final exam, which covers material through the entire course. You should review in particular, lecture notes, O’Mara’s The Code and other course readings provided on Canvas.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing Sharepoint Designer with Frontpage 2003 As Discussed Earlier, Sharepoint Designer Is the Designing Tool for the Current Release of Sharepoint
    Becoming Familiar with SharePoint Designer he Internet has long been one of the favorite mechanisms of expres- sion because of the wide reach, connection, and exposure it offers. IN THIS CHAPTER It’s one of the basic means of communication in the 21st century and T Introducing SharePoint has drawn people closer in unique ways. Having a presence on the Internet Designer is a pivotal requirement for any organization, irrespective of its size, nature, or range of operations. Web sites on the Internet provide the canvas that Understanding SharePoint organizations can use to explain their missions and goals, advertise their Designer basics products, perform business transactions, and communicate with their cus- tomers and partners. Exploring hidden metadata and raw Webs It’s apparent that the Internet as a medium offers tremendous prospects and Maintaining Web sites opportunities. To exploit this medium, Web site designers have a range of Internet technologies to choose from. From simple markup languages (such as HTML) to complex application development technologies (such as ASP. NET), there are a variety of platforms on which you can base your Web site application. To achieve the most from these technologies without having to re-create a lot of work, many Web site development tools and products are available to you. Microsoft’s key offerings for these tools and products have been FrontPage and Visual Studio. While Visual Studio is targeted to Web developers and complex Web application development, FrontPage is designed to provide a simplerCOPYRIGHTED no-code-based software development MATERIAL tool that helps Web site designers focus on designing Web sites rather than have to deal with the complex code that goes behind Web site development and still be able to create complex Web sites.
    [Show full text]
  • FOSS Philosophy 6 the FOSS Development Method 7
    1 Published by the United Nations Development Programme’s Asia-Pacific Development Information Programme (UNDP-APDIP) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia www.apdip.net Email: [email protected] © UNDP-APDIP 2004 The material in this book may be reproduced, republished and incorporated into further works provided acknowledgement is given to UNDP-APDIP. For full details on the license governing this publication, please see the relevant Annex. ISBN: 983-3094-00-7 Design, layout and cover illustrations by: Rezonanze www.rezonanze.com PREFACE 6 INTRODUCTION 6 What is Free/Open Source Software? 6 The FOSS philosophy 6 The FOSS development method 7 What is the history of FOSS? 8 A Brief History of Free/Open Source Software Movement 8 WHY FOSS? 10 Is FOSS free? 10 How large are the savings from FOSS? 10 Direct Cost Savings - An Example 11 What are the benefits of using FOSS? 12 Security 13 Reliability/Stability 14 Open standards and vendor independence 14 Reduced reliance on imports 15 Developing local software capacity 15 Piracy, IPR, and the WTO 16 Localization 16 What are the shortcomings of FOSS? 17 Lack of business applications 17 Interoperability with proprietary systems 17 Documentation and “polish” 18 FOSS SUCCESS STORIES 19 What are governments doing with FOSS? 19 Europe 19 Americas 20 Brazil 21 Asia Pacific 22 Other Regions 24 What are some successful FOSS projects? 25 BIND (DNS Server) 25 Apache (Web Server) 25 Sendmail (Email Server) 25 OpenSSH (Secure Network Administration Tool) 26 Open Office (Office Productivity Suite) 26 LINUX 27 What is Linux?
    [Show full text]
  • INSIDE MICROSOFT (Part 2) 2/7/04 2:30 PM
    07/15/96 INSIDE MICROSOFT (Part 2) 2/7/04 2:30 PM INSIDE MICROSOFT (Part 2) The untold story of how the Internet forced Bill Gates to reverse course (Continued from Part 1) BABY STEPS. In one breakout group, Allard tangled with Russell Siegelman, who was heading Marvel, the code name for what's now the Microsoft Network online service. Allard argued that instead of being proprietary, Marvel should be based on Web standards. Siegelman held his ground--and won. It was a decision that would later cost millions to reverse. Still, Net progress was made: TCP/IP would be integrated into Win95 and Windows NT, the version of Windows that runs network-server computers. The sales team was told to use the Web to dispense marketing information. The applications group agreed to give Word, the word-processing program, the ability to create Web pages. Next, Gates jumped deeper into the process by devoting much of his April Think Week--a semiannual retreat--to the Internet. His Apr. 16 memo, ``Internet Strategy and Technical Goals,'' contained the first signs of a growing corporate commitment. ``We want to and will invest resources to be a leader in Internet support,'' wrote Gates. It was a first step, albeit a measured one. ``I don't think he knew how much to bet yet,'' says Allard. But board member David F. Marquardt did: He recalls that he was ``amazed'' that Microsoft was putting so little into the Net. ``They weren't in Silicon Valley. When you're here, you feel it all around you,'' says Marquardt, a general partner at Technology Venture Investors in Menlo Park, Calif.
    [Show full text]
  • Intellectual Property
    Intellectual Property Adam Goode Computer Ethics December 6, 2000 Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Traditional Ideas About Property 1 3 Ideas as Property 2 4 Traditional Property Notions Applied To Intellectual Items 3 5 Software Should Be Free 5 6 Conclusion 5 1 Introduction Intellectual property is a controversial topic. The term itself is often ill-defined and confusing. According to one definition, intellectual property is “The own- ership of ideas and control over the tangible or virtual representation of those ideas (Howe, 2000).” But can ideas really have owners and control? Some (no- tably those like Richard Stallman) would advocate “no.” And of course, most software business leaders would give a powerful “yes.” The author of this paper is under the persuasion that intellectual property does not make sense (at least in software) and that control over one’s ideas is something that one gives up the moment he releases them to the world. This notion will be examined, as well as the notions of traditional property, ideas as property, where intellectual property seems to fit in with software, and why it really cannot. 2 Traditional Ideas About Property The word “property” brings out certain specific mental images. Ideas that spring to mind with the mention of property include things like “house” (dwelling as 1 property), “car” (machine as property), “yard” (land as property), or even “pet” (animal as property). Not many people initially think of “idea” or “notion” as a thing which might have property. Property has generally been restricted to things in the physical realm. Cer- tainly a person’s house or car can be considered property.
    [Show full text]
  • Incorporating the Commons: a Political Economic Analysis
    INCORPORATING THE COMMONS: A POLITICAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CORPORATE INVOLVEMENT IN FREE AND OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE by BENJAMIN J. BIRKINBINE A DISSERTATION Presented to the School of Journalism and Communication and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy September 2014 DISSERTATION APPROVAL PAGE Student: Benjamin J. Birkinbine Title: Incorporating the Commons: A Political Economic Analysis of Corporate Involvement in Free and Open Source Software This dissertation has been accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree in the School of Journalism and Communication by: Dr. Janet Wasko Chairperson Dr. Biswarup Sen Core Member Dr. Gabriela Martinez Core Member Eric Priest, J.D. Institutional Representative and J. Andrew Berglund Dean of the Graduate School Original approval signatures are on file with the University of Oregon Graduate School. Degree awarded September 2014 ii DISSERTATION ABSTRACT Benjamin J. Birkinbine Doctor of Philosophy School of Journalism and Communication September 2014 Title: Incorporating the Commons: A Political Economic Analysis of Corporate Involvement in Free and Open Source Software Free (libre) and open source software (FLOSS) emerged in the 1980s as a radical alternative to proprietary software. Fighting back against what FLOSS enthusiasts viewed as overly restrictive intellectual property protections placed on proprietary software, FLOSS was designed with the intent of granting users the right to study, modify, adapt, or otherwise tinker with the source code of software. As such, FLOSS users were able to collaborate in producing software that could be distributed freely and widely to others, who could, in turn, make changes to the software.
    [Show full text]
  • Microsoft Frontpage - Wikipédia
    16/02/13 Microsoft FrontPage - Wikipédia Microsoft FrontPage Microsoft FrontPage (officiellement Microsoft Office FrontPage) est un logiciel propriétaire qui fut inclus dans la Microsoft Office FrontPage suite Microsoft Office entre 1997 et 2003. C'est un logiciel de création de page Web de type WYSIWYG, permettant de travailler avec le code HTML fonctionnant sur les systèmes d'exploitation Windows. Une version Macintosh a également été publiée en 1998. Depuis décembre 2006, il a été remplacé par Microsoft Expression Web et Microsoft Office SharePoint Designer. Sommaire 1 Historique Développeur Microsoft 2 Description Dernière 2003 3 Fonctionnalités version 4 Critiques Environnement Windows 4.1 La qualité du code Type Logiciel WYSIWYG de 4.2 La non-interopérabilité création de sites Web 5 Versions Licence Propriétaire 6 Voir aussi 6.1 Articles connexes 7 Liens externes Historique FrontPage fut créé par la société Vermeer Technologies Incorporated (Cambridge, Massachusetts, États-Unis), ce qui peut être mis en évidence d'une façon assez facile grâce aux préfixes _vti_ qui figurent sur les noms des fichiers et dossiers créés par FrontPage pour un site web. Vermeer Technologies Incorporated a été acheté par Microsoft en 1996, dans l'unique but de pouvoir inclure FrontPage dans la suite Office. Comme tout éditeur WYSIWYG, FrontPage cachait le code HTML à l'utilisateur. Ce qui permettait à des utilisateurs novices de pouvoir créer un site web facilement. La première version de FrontPage estampillé Microsoft fut publiée en 1996 lors de la sortie de Windows NT 4.0 Server. Disponible sur un CD annexe lors de l'achat de Windows NT 4.0, FrontPage 1.1 pouvait être utilisé avec un système d'exploitation du type NT 4.0 (Server ou Workstation) ou encore Windows 95, et le but était de permettre aux administrateurs informatiques de créer des sites web évolués de la même façon que s'ils utilisaient Microsoft Word.
    [Show full text]
  • Incorporating the Digital Commons:Corporate Involvement in Free and Open Source Software
    INCORPORATING THE DIGITAL COMMONS DIGITAL THE INCORPORATING INCORPORATING THE CDSMS DIGITAL COMMONS he concept of ‘the commons’ has been used as a framework to understand resources shared by a community rather than a private BENJAMIN J. BIRKINBINE T entity, and it has also inspired social movements working against the enclosure of public goods and resources. One such resource is free (libre) and open source software (FLOSS). FLOSS emerged as an alternative to proprietary software in the 1980s. However, both the products and production processes of FLOSS have become incorporated into capitalist INCORPORATING THE production. For example, Red Hat, Inc. is a large publicly traded company whose business model relies entirely on free software, and IBM, Intel, Cisco, Samsung, Google are some of the largest contributors to Linux, the DIGITAL COMMONS open-source operating system. This book explores the ways in which FLOSS has been incorporated into digital capitalism. Just as the commons have been used as a motivational frame for radical social movements, it has also Corporate Involvement in Free served the interests of free-marketeers, corporate libertarians, and states to expand their reach by dragging the shared resources of social life onto and Open Source Software digital platforms so they can be integrated into the global capitalist system. The book concludes by asserting the need for a critical political economic understanding of the commons that foregrounds (digital) labour, class struggle, and uneven power distribution within the digital commons as well as between FLOSS communities and their corporate sponsors. BENJAMIN J. BIRKINBINE J. BENJAMIN COMMUNICATION STUDIES | POLITICAL ECONOMY | MEDIA INDUSTRIES CDSMS CRITICAL DIGITAL AND SOCIAL MEDIA STUDIES THE AUTHOR Benjamin J.
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced BASIC VCFE9.Pdf
    Advanced BASIC Vintage Computer Festival 9.1 Bill Degnan Course Outline • BASIC Overview • Matricies • BASIC Timing Comparisons 1977 • Micro-Soft vs. Tiny BASIC • Micro-Soft BASIC Breakdown using PEEK BASIC Overview • BASIC has three classes of capabilities: commands, statements, and functions. • Commands “part of the operating system or environment” and manipulate global items, such as programs • Statements are made up of keywords, variables, constants, operators, and functions • Functions - A user-defined and library functions. BASIC Overview • Constants. BASIC programs are made up of statements that contain keywords, variables, operators, and constants • Numeric constants (Floating point and Integer) - Each BASIC version handles numeric constants differently. • Character String constants - signaled by a quote (") • Variables - "names" that may take on different values during a problem. - vintage versions of BASIC required variables to start with a letter. Matricies (1966 Dartmouth BASIC) • A matrix is simply a rectangular array of numbers • An array is a set of numbers arranged in rows and columns • A matrix may also consist of a single row or a single column, also called “row vectors” (lists) and “column vectors”. 10 REM MATRICIES USING DARTMOUTH BASIC 20 DIM S(2,2) 30 MAT READ S ... 240 DATA 30, 50 245 DATA 40, 25 250 FOR K=1 TO 2 260 PRINT S(K,1) 270 NEXT K RUN [What would be the output??] Matricies (Digital PDP 11 BASIC) 10 DIM A(2,3) 20 FOR I=0 TO 2 30 FOR J=0 TO 3: LET A(I,J) = 0 40 NEXT J 50 NEXT I 60 FOR I = 0 TO 2: LET A(I,0) = I 70 FOR J = 0 TO 3: LET A(0,J) = J 80 PRINT A(I,J); 90 NEXT J 100 PRINT 110 NEXT I 120 END RUN 0 1 2 3 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 STOP AT LINE 120 READY What’s different? The Knight’s Tour • Chess is played on a square board having 64 smaller squares, eight on a side.
    [Show full text]
  • Personal Computing
    Personal Computing Thomas J. Bergin ©Computer History Museum American University Recap: Context • By 1977, there was a fairly robust but fragmented hobbyist-oriented microcomputer industry: – Micro Instrumentation Telemetry Systems (MITS) – Processor Technology – Cromemco – MicroStuf – Kentucky Fried Computers • Two things were needed for the personal computer revolution: 1) a way to store and retrieve data, and 2) a programming language in which to write applications. Homebrew Computer Club • March 5, 1975: the Amateur Computer Users Group (Lee Felsenstein, Bob Marsh, Steve Dompier, BobAlbrecht and 27 others) met in Gordon French’s garage, Menlo Park, CA • 3rd meeting drew several hundred people and was moved to the Coleman mansion • Stanford Linear Accelerator Center’s auditorium – Steve Wozniak shows off his single board computer – Steve Jobs attends meetings Homebrew-ed • 21 companies formed: – Apcose Apple – Cromemco Morrow – North Star Osborne • West Coast Computer Faire • Byte magazine, September 1975 • Byte Shop Both: images.google.com And then there was Traf-O-Data • October 28, 1955: William H. Gates III born – father: attorney mother: schoolteacher • Lakeside School: Lakeside Programming Group – Mothers Club: access to time-shared system at GE – Students hired by local firm to debug software – First computer program: Tic-Tac-Toe (age 13) – Traf-O-Data to sell traffic mgt. software (age 16) • 1973, Bill Gates enrolls at Harvard in pre-law. • Paul Allen is in his second year. January 1975, Popular Electronics: Altair • Allen shows
    [Show full text]
  • The Public Domain Enclosing the Commons of the Mind by James
    The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind Boyle, James Published: 2008 Categorie(s): Non-Fiction Source: http://yupnet.org/boyle/ 1 About Boyle: James Boyle is the William Neal Reynolds Professor of Law and co- founder of the Center for the Study of the Public Domain at Duke University School of Law in Durham, North Carolina. He was one of the founding board members of Creative Commons, and currently chairs the board. Boyle joined Duke University School of Law in July 2000. He has previously taught at the American University, Yale, Harvard, and the University of Pennsylvania Law School. He is the author of Shamans, Software and Spleens: Law and Construction of the Information Society as well as a novel published under a Creative Commons license, The Shakespeare Chronicles. In 2003, he won the World Technology Award for Law for his work on the intellectual ecology of the public domain, and on the "Second Enclosure Movement" that threatens it. Boyle also contributes a column to the Financial Times New Technology Policy For- um. Source: Wikipedia Copyright: Please read the legal notice included in this e-book and/or check the copyright status in your country. Note: This book is brought to you by Feedbooks http://www.feedbooks.com Strictly for personal use, do not use this file for commercial purposes. 2 Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License. 3 Preface Each person has a different breaking point. For one of my students it was United States Patent number 6,004,596 for a “Sealed Crustless Sand- wich.” In the curiously mangled form of English that patent law pro- duces, it was described this way: A sealed crustless sandwich for providing a convenient sandwich without an outer crust which can be stored for long periods of time without a central filling from leaking outwardly.
    [Show full text]