RE: Tao Te Ching

RE: Tao Te Ching (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

ArtCatDom -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/8/2006 9:30:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chaingang quote: ORIGINAL: valeca You are misinformed about 'information not working that way anymore'. The internet falls under the copyright laws (if you pick up any book, you'll notice in the copyright 'electronic or mechanical means' is cited--that's the internet). Mark my words: Copyright is dead. Patent is dead. I think it's possible that private property is dead too. "The street has it's own uses for things." Now who am I quoting? The only people who think copyright is dead or dying are people who have no clue what's happening in intellectual property heavy industries, to be honest. Copyrights and other IP are adapting quite well to the digital age, regardless of fringe moaning and groaning. Are their growing pains as industries and artists adapt to new technologies? Of course! However, I don't see our current tech as any more of threat to IP than was the printing press, Xerox (tm) machines or the VCR. I believe the hype (on one side that copyright is dead, on the other that it's terribly endangered) is the same old claptrap that comes up every time a new tech makes it easier to copy. (Remember the dread threat of two deck cassette recorders and the plague of bootlegs? What damage that did to copyright, eh?) While I'm on the topic, why do most people ignore movements like Creative Commons? Licensing work for limited reuse is the strongest trend from the people producing works themselves. Plus, mechanical licensing and license pools have become all the more accessible (and more widely used) taking advantage of the very same technology most people say is going to kill intellectual property. On a final note in this mini-rant, I will point out the utter hypocracy of the copyleft movement. Most people who claim to support the abolition of IP rights license their work under Creative Commons (usually with the requirements that you cannot use their work for commercial purposes and you need to attribute them) or under the GPL (which is a messy horror, heavily restricts use and requires any use to be licensed the same). Tell you what Chaingang, you can be free to STEAL and PLAGARIZE my hard work the day I also have the right to take your paycheck. What the hell makes people like you think they are somehow entitled to my hard labor? meow

ArtCatDom -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/8/2006 9:32:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chaingang quote: ORIGINAL: valeca You are misinformed about 'information not working that way anymore'. The internet falls under the copyright laws (if you pick up any book, you'll notice in the copyright 'electronic or mechanical means' is cited--that's the internet). Mark my words: Copyright is dead. Patent is dead. I think it's possible that private property is dead too. "The street has it's own uses for things." Now who am I quoting? By the by, a distinctive Gibson line, if mildly misquoted. meow

ArtCatDom -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/8/2006 9:34:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chaingang quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster 1. You're using Stephen Mitchell's translation, and he doesn't even know Chinese. 2. His translation is under copyright. 3. You don't cite him. Sorry, information no longer works that way... http://www.starstuffs.com/taoteching/ http://www.nokama.com/tao/ http://home.pages.at/onkellotus/ http://www.westernreformtaoism.org/home.php It does when the copyright owner has a judge issue an injunction, or even more easily files complaint with the hosting service (who will 99/100 times issue a warning and then a disconnect notice). Just because someone might be getting away with a theft for a time doesn't make it correct. meow

VvShadowspawnvV -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/8/2006 10:00:44 AM)
Personally, if I have to READ such things, I enjoy the translation by Gia-Fu Feng and Jane English... There is a new edition, smaller without the photography, but in my opinion, it is only half as useful.... The larger original (1972) is worth tracking down, it is a beautiful book, and the words themselves may even be worth reading occasionally... There is a companion volume as well, originally written by someone named Chuang Tzu... another silly windbag... But is has nice pictures too.... ;-)

Level -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/8/2006 10:12:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fergus And I am not including fergus in the slimey fucker group, by the way. He was just trying to share something he felt strongly about, not trying to steal someone else's thunder, or profit from his posting of the Tao. I sorely do appreciate that, Level. and I am in the process of correcting it as we speak :) fergus You're quite welcome, fergus.

VvShadowspawnvV -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/8/2006 10:29:49 AM)
P.S.... Does anyone else see the humor in a bunch of people on the internet arguing about the "Intellectual Property Rights" of a TAOIST text? heh... "No fight: No blame... Give up ingenuity, renounce profit, And bandits and thieves will disappear... give up learning, and put and end to your troubles... Those who know do not talk. Those who talk do not know." Lao-Tzu (Feng & English translation) Lest I too get myself into trouble... "The mouth is the front gate of all misfortune" - Buddhist Proverb

Lordandmaster -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/8/2006 10:36:01 AM)
This isn't about the Taoist text; it's about Stephen Mitchell's copyrighted translation of that text. Crucial distinction. If Fergus wanted to post the whole damned thing in Chinese (though he couldn't have done that, because it doesn't seem to be possible to post Chinese on CM--I've tried), no one would have said a word. quote: ORIGINAL: VvShadowspawnvV P.S.... Does anyone else see the humor in a bunch of people on the internet arguing about the "Intellectual Property Rights" of a TAOIST text? heh...

ArtCatDom -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/8/2006 3:43:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VvShadowspawnvV P.S.... Does anyone else see the humor in a bunch of people on the internet arguing about the "Intellectual Property Rights" of a TAOIST text? heh... "No fight: No blame... Give up ingenuity, renounce profit, And bandits and thieves will disappear... give up learning, and put and end to your troubles... Those who know do not talk. Those who talk do not know." Lao-Tzu (Feng & English translation) Lest I too get myself into trouble... "The mouth is the front gate of all misfortune" - Buddhist Proverb It's not about the text itself, but rather a specific interpolation of that text which someone holds the rights too. However, that wasn't even the point of my posting. My posts about copyright were spurred by delusional (at best) assertions regarding general copyright and intellectual property. By the by, I license nearly all of my writing and music under Creative Commons BY-NC (that is anyone is free to use it noncommercially so long as I'm credited). I retain my rights while allowing free sharing and use of the materials. meow

Chaingang -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/8/2006 7:31:19 PM)
Gentlemen: I must differ on this copyrights and patents thing. Look at the history of Microsoft or even Apple for that matter. Look at the typesetting/font industries. I could go on... There is a long history of piracy and outright theft of "IP" ideas even amongt the biggest and most powerful. IP laws exist simply to deter the competition. I mean, you think Microsoft wrote DOS? Is that right? There are attempts to keep these lame legal fictions alive, and I understand that the law and legal authorities are still in collusion on the matter - but the world has it's own uses for ideas and neither one country nor even one ultra powerful corporation can change that. On a global scale, these things just don't exist and are being beaten down every time someone uses a TIVO/cable box to transfer data to a PC, or ripping a CD, hacking a proggie, or loaning a friend a digital book, etc. The end is nigh...

VvShadowspawnvV -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/9/2006 8:13:10 AM)
Hmm... I guess that would be a "No"..... I understand the arguement, it is an old one, my point was simply that it is amusing to fight over the who owns the "rights" to the words they use to describe a philosophy which it totally AGAINST the use of words to express reality.... As far as the "legality" of the topic, we could argue forever, and I suppose enough people think it is important enough to do so... The discussion of "rights", however makes me laugh... "It is said that every morning Lao Tzu used to go for a walk in the hills. One friend asked him, "Can I come with you one day? I would particularly like to come tomorrow, because I have a guest who is very much interested in you, and he will be immensely glad to have the opportunity to be with you for two hours in the mountains." Lao Tzu said, "I have no objection, just one simple thing has to be remembered. I don't want anything to be said because I have my eyes, you have your eyes, he has his eyes, we can see. There is no need to say anything." The friend agreed, but on the way when the sun started rising the guest forgot. It was so beautiful by the side of the lake, the reflection of all the colors, the birds singing and the lotuses blossoming, opening, he could not resist, he forgot. He said, "What a beautiful sunrise." His host was shocked because he has broken the condition. Lao Tzu did not say anything, nothing was said there. Back home he called his friend and told him, "Don't bring your guest again. He is too talkative. The sunrise was there, I was there, he was there, you were there -- what is the need to say anything, any comment, any interpretation?" (an excerpt from The Third Quantum Leap by Osho)" -From one of the pages linked to in the earlier replies ;-)

VvShadowspawnvV -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/9/2006 8:32:46 AM)
Oops... that posted as a reply to Chaingang, who seems closest to "getting the joke" I was referring to, and who posted the sites referenced... More words to explain my words... I suppose I should take my own advice and shut up now. Just wanted to lighten things up a bit. -Peace, Love, and Lysergic Acid... "Nothing really matters, Anyone can see, Nothing really matters... To me." -Queen

Alumbrado -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/9/2006 8:55:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chaingang Gentlemen: I must differ on this copyrights and patents thing. Look at the history of Microsoft or even Apple for that matter. Look at the typesetting/font industries. I could go on... There is a long history of piracy and outright theft of "IP" ideas even amongt the biggest and most powerful. IP laws exist simply to deter the competition. I mean, you think Microsoft wrote DOS? Is that right? There are attempts to keep these lame legal fictions alive, and I understand that the law and legal authorities are still in collusion on the matter - but the world has it's own uses for ideas and neither one country nor even one ultra powerful corporation can change that. On a global scale, these things just don't exist and are being beaten down every time someone uses a TIVO/cable box to transfer data to a PC, or ripping a CD, hacking a proggie, or loaning a friend a digital book, etc. The end is nigh... And when enough people 'beat the system' in that manner, the powerful corporations protect their bottom line by slashing the budget for new and unusual creative artists development, or reproducing obscure catalogs, and they dump more money into 'sure things' like Britney Spears, or Paris Hilton's upcoming 'rap' CD. The anti-IP movement has become the new champions of mediocrity. "...Same as it ever was"

Chaingang -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/9/2006 2:55:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado The anti-IP movement has become the new champions of mediocrity. I think you may have this perfectly the wrong way around. What are the good musical acts from 1996-2006? Music from the industry machine has stunk for several years. The artists themselves would seem to make the most money from concert tours. The recorded songs in the main act as an advertisement for the performers. From a purely artistic perspective, I don't see the issue really. Most of the music I am interested in is self-published anyway and I do not listen to radio. I pretty much don't care if Geffen decides he's unhappy with the amount of swag he is scoring off his stable of artists...

ArtCatDom -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/9/2006 3:55:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VvShadowspawnvV P.S.... Does anyone else see the humor in a bunch of people on the internet arguing about the "Intellectual Property Rights" of a TAOIST text? heh... "No fight: No blame... Give up ingenuity, renounce profit, And bandits and thieves will disappear... give up learning, and put and end to your troubles... Those who know do not talk. Those who talk do not know." Lao-Tzu (Feng & English translation) Lest I too get myself into trouble... "The mouth is the front gate of all misfortune" - Buddhist Proverb I was thinking of this thread and a couple ancient Ch'an (Zen) stories that have been told in a thousand fashions came to mind. Sifu Chan was a famous master of the sutras and meditation. In the monestary high in the mountains, there was a student who could seem to make no progress named Chen. Chen had mastered all the arts of meditation, yet no peace was in him. Chen had mastered every potion of chi kung, yet no wisdon lived in him. Chen had mastered every koan, yet no sight awakened him. Chen despaired. One day after the morning sitting, Chen went to Sifu Chan to see advice. Chen said, "Master, I have failed you. Every technique is my slave, yet my spirit still drifts on troubled waters." Sifu Chan replied, "Forget everything." Chen was vexed and sorely confused. He protested and asked more questions, but the old Sifu would only reply with those same two words. For days Chen sought the advice of his teacher and every time was rebuffed with the same reply. Chen sat for weeks puzzling the reply as a koan. Chen sat for months seeking the hidden wisdon between syllables. Chen sat for a full year making the phrase a worldless truth. When he stood, he became excited and run quickly to Sifu Chan's chambers. Chen shouted, "Master! Master! I have forgotten how to make elixirs!" Sifu Chan without lifting his head replied, "Forget everything." Chen returned to his sitting and returned his awareness to worldless forgetfulness. The next week, he again stood excited. He ran quickly to the courtyard where his teacher was gardening. "Master, great teacher, I have forgotten the sutras!" "Forget everything." Chen once again returned to silent meditation. A week later, he once again became excited. He ran to his teacher at the morning meal. "Master, I have forgotten the names of all the boddhisattvas!" "Forget everything." Chen began to panic. What else could he forget? Was he misinterpreting? Was he casting away of all his valuable lessons? He ran into the forest and sought peace among the trees for a full month. Some months later he strolled calmly into the monestary. He quietly and warmly greeted each monk along his way. He eventually came upon his teacher and greeted him softly. Chen said nearly whispering, "Master, I have forgotten how to sit in contemplation. I have forgotten what is it I should or should not eat. I have forgotten how to watch for ch'an." Sifu Chan was silent for some moments before saying, "You have gone so far. It is I who should call you teacher!" ------------ A sifu, widely known for his knowledge of Tao and Ch'an, was sitting beside a river enjoying the day. Many came to him to seek his wisdom, but most were discouraged before the sun set. After a while, students began to try and prove their worth through word and deed. One such fellow, named Bai, came upon the master fishing on the river. Bai said, "Master! Master! Please teach me! There is nothing that I need so much as wisdom! Nothing in this world of dust do I desire so much as enlightenment!" The teacher grabbed Bai's hair and plunged his head under water. The sifu held Bai there under the water for nearly five minutes, while Bai flailed and stuggled, full of drowning panic. When the sifu lifted up the drowning student, he aked "What was it you just now desired most?" Bai replied, "AIR!!!!" The master said, "Come back to me when your desire is that great." --------- Chang Tzu was once approached by a governor of a prospering province. The leader was deeply disturbed. He lived well. His people were cheerful. Crime had nearly faded away. Yet the governor had no peace and could not rest. The leader asked Chang Tzu, "Tell me wise one, which text have I not read? I rule the people as I should and the people are well. I tend the land as I should and farms produce abundantly. I rule myself as I should, yet I have no rest." Chang Tzu replied, "Poor man, have you not read what you have read? You do all things correctly but one. Words are always lies. Each stroke is a falsehood. Every sign is misleading. Every breath is an illusion. Even now I am lying to your face." And the governor became enlightened. meow

ArtCatDom -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/9/2006 4:03:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VvShadowspawnvV Personally, if I have to READ such things, I enjoy the translation by Gia-Fu Feng and Jane English... There is a new edition, smaller without the photography, but in my opinion, it is only half as useful.... The larger original (1972) is worth tracking down, it is a beautiful book, and the words themselves may even be worth reading occasionally... There is a companion volume as well, originally written by someone named Chuang Tzu... another silly windbag... But is has nice pictures too.... ;-) You might be interested in the Tao Te Ching (The Definitive Edition) by Johnathon Star. It has a very nice translation by Mr. Star at the beginning. The rest of the book goes through the Tao Te Ching character by character, explaining dictionary definitions, context and alternative readings from various manuscripts. It even has a nice appendix about the Chinese radicals (the "roots" of the characters). You might also be interested in Understanding Reality. It is an excellant Taoist alchemical text. Most translations focus on a psychological/philosophical interpretation. It does work quite well as a series of lessons and koans. However, if you are also familiar with internal alchemy and/or chi kung, it's a lesson book of a differant variety. Also, it's a wonderful book of inspirational verse when you need some mantra to get you through the day. Finally, it's just lovely to read, the turns of idea and tongue simply beautiful. Then again, Taoist texts tend to be of the sort and value that you make of them. meow

Alumbrado -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/10/2006 12:42:32 PM)
quote: I think you may have this perfectly the wrong way around. What are the good musical acts from 1996-2006? Music from the industry machine has stunk for several years. The artists themselves would seem to make the most money from concert tours. The recorded songs in the main act as an advertisement for the performers. From a purely artistic perspective, I don't see the issue really. Most of the music I am interested in is self-published anyway and I do not listen to radio. I pretty much don't care if Geffen decides he's unhappy with the amount of swag he is scoring off his stable of artists... I would disagree with your assertion specifically as it applies to the major record companies, which is after all, the point to which you replied. I seriously doubt that the major corporations in the recording industry rationalize that it is OK to lose record sales because the artists themselves profit from live event proceeds.... In general the artists themselves do not directly discover, record, produce, and promote the next act on a major label, the corporation does that, in the guise of employees whose job depends on being able to quantify their results in a cost/benefit anlaysis...in other words, sales figures. This is the same affliction that has beset Hollywood, literature, and the live theater community for decades, and hindred anything innovative (read 'risky' ) from getting major backing...and the notion that the corporate music interests will suddenly abandon profit motive to share in an altruistic pipe dream rings hollow. And as you yourself pont out, where are all these great new risky acts from recent years? Certainly not on the major labels. Which of course means that there is plenty of room for individual creative efforts to operate outside of the mainstream coprorate machine...along with the millions of schlock acts using the same self promoting methods, thus effective burying anything really new in a tidal wave of faux-hip mediocrity. But, if you really believe that piracy is going to solve the corporate stifling of artistic creativty, far be it from me to argue.

Chaingang -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/10/2006 7:07:04 PM)
The idea that big corporations act as useful gatekeepers producing quality is absurd. First you assert they want only profits, then you agree or likewise claim they have no quality acts - so then, why should anyone care...? Profits can be and are manipulated. Artists are routinely ripped off. There is a thing called Payola. Everything about the music industry reeks of abuse and corruption. But right - we need them, huh? You act as if word of mouth and people discovering for themselves what is good is impossible. It's not. There are even ways to use social networking algorithms to find you the music you will like. In fact, there's all kinds of non-traditional aids that are being created technologically to help one find music to one's liking. It's all out there.

Chaingang -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/13/2006 10:09:08 AM)
From: http://www.wired.com/news/culture/music/0,70586-1.html?tw=wn_story_page_next1 an interview with Michael Nesmith --- WN: Now that indie musicians and filmmakers are selling direct to their fans -- sometimes hundreds of thousands of units -- what role can the corporate media play? Nesmith: I don't hold much hope for Warner Music Group or Sony being a player in the future…. The problem with those kind of companies is that they don't have any good way to add value anymore. For years, they'd support the artist in their nascent stages and get the goods to market. Those are old-time, Methuselean economics…. There are whole new businesses that will wander in and boot these guys out. WN: So we can write the obituaries? Nesmith: Those obituaries were written two decades ago. What you are seeing here is an inertial burn (laughs).

Alumbrado -> RE: Tao Te Ching (4/13/2006 3:55:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chaingang The idea that big corporations act as useful gatekeepers producing quality is absurd. First you assert they want only profits, then you agree or likewise claim they have no quality acts - so then, why should anyone care...? Profits can be and are manipulated. Artists are routinely ripped off. There is a thing called Payola. Everything about the music industry reeks of abuse and corruption. But right - we need them, huh? You act as if word of mouth and people discovering for themselves what is good is impossible. It's not. There are even ways to use social networking algorithms to find you the music you will like. In fact, there's all kinds of non-traditional aids that are being created technologically to help one find music to one's liking. It's all out there. Sorry, if you want to argue with out of context misquotes, and actually expect a debate over your straw men, you are just going to have to do it alone. On the other hand if you have anything useful to contribute to a discourse on the points I actually raised, I'd find that fantastic.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125