Friday, 20 January 2012

Creativity, Theft and Laws

Leibniz and Newton invented something very significant for Science and Mathematics in the form of Calculus. Though both of them did so independently, it was perhaps partially because of the power that the chair of Royal Society gave to Newton and partially because of some jealous people that Leibniz had to face some difficulty in getting full credit for his work. Leibniz indeed started later than Newton but evidence shows that he invented Calculus independently.

In this case, as plethora of work by Bertrand Russel shows, Leibniz turns out to be a greater genius than Newton. No matter how powerful Newton was or has been, some very educated opinions from Russel and like give due credit to Leibniz.

That said, both of them were Polymaths and Universal Geniuses. They would not have been discredited just because one of them would have invented a tool prior to the other. The productivity of Leibniz and Newton was astounding and that makes both of them unique.

Leonardo Da Vinci also had so many achievements and as time has passed by his achievements have made a greater impression. The point is that creators need not always be too concerned with profit. Being too conscious of getting copied without getting credit makes you a bit less fluent than natural in my opinion. 

That is however not to suggest that there should not be resistance against theft. True creativity cannot be hidden or suppressed. Here it's not just credit for creativity which seems to be at stake but business based on that creativity.

I read in one discussion that if you would have enforced such bills then Justin Bieber  would not have made it so big just by one song. The message is--such platforms do help artists. The comment did say that artists make a lot by live shows and it's not just their originals being sold which make them rich. I think a lot is going on in the name of Law against piracy. Here in India a leader from ruling party filed a case against Facebook and other social networking websites because they were allegedly circulating some obscene materials, especially against the leaders of ruling party. This is just too much. Isn't it? Now, they want a total control on the messages people circulate on social networking sites. Whatever happened to freedom of speech?

I also read that mainstream media has not given full coverage to protest against SOPA and PIPA. 

Some people have said that instead of having such bills which might be misused by very powerful people, it's better to have individuals fight for their works where they find it feasible and indispensable ( Though such ways might not work always). In that way, you would at least fight for your right. There is much visibility. In case of Law-That-Forces-Things-Absurdum on you there is no visibility and a lot is going on behind the gates.