Posted by: Sk | February 13, 2009

5 What is mine? Identity and property…

My imaginary character, Mr. Judge of California, may think after the preceding article that I may stand in favor of the total destruction of rights of author and intellectual property. Nothing is in fact farer away from my fundamental dispositions, as I do think, quite radically on the other hand, that a human being’s identity is formed by the proper expression of his being in activity, which is to say, that the knowledge as basis of his social, commercial or other activity builds up the core of his identity. Consequently I may be the most fundamental enemy of the ‘copying, taking for mine, substituting, and pretending’ psychology as taught almost as religion in France after Sartre having taken for his whole parts of Heidegger’s philosophy by just pretending the translation was his, ever since. On the other hand, I may though be a quite cynical opponent of laws that do allow some people preserving some rights because they’ve paid for the registration (things going so far as this not being of need anymore, it being enough to belong to some ‘groupuscules’ or intelligentsia in order to see your rights protected by general claims and popular shouts, as ‘the masses determine law in France’), while originals belong to some one else who has never been given the chance to register anything in order to exploit him better. Thus, international legislation tending to protect creation through programs as XP, Adobe Photoshop etc., where the date of creation can’t be changed and act as warrant for who the author (although leaving many points to jurisprudence, as in the cases of use of a common computer, or a public space, etc.) seemed to build some kind of relief against the general stealing, appropriating, usurping politics becoming more and more general in so called ‘civilized’ occidental countries. Not to say that these means are still not recognized in France and other countries, it is that the question is more fundamental. As pointed out in, I’ve never felt more sadness than the day I saw a Pakistani Palace in Lahore whose wall still showed the empty holes of the precious stones taken away by the English while … leaving. Or remembering the story of the Parthenon frescos (bas reliefs), simply stolen away with a fake governmental order by an English Lord at the end of the XIXth and still in London. Worse still, and where sadness becomes anger if not fury, seeing Galliano taking thousands for Dior with ‘inspirations’ coming from Spanish traditional dresses, or African fashion being sealed as ‘exclusive French creation’, just because it is the property of the people and no one in Spain has ever thought of registering a gypsy’s flamenco dress. Anger becomes despair when the Swedish claim Greek feta has been registered by them and frozen irony when images of Russian icons are sold by the Catholic Church, with registered right, certainly, because they made … the electronic picture (!)All these by the way observations do certainly not excuse illegal behavior, although it tempts. Sometimes, provocation, which is illegal in a certain number of countries, and even called ’social terrorism’ in France, does though help clearing up a certain number of questions if, I have always thought, you don’t fall into the abyss of the illegal.

Well, my little moving icons are not registered in Ecuador. It’s an advantage, I may sell. In order, though, not to confuse people concerning my maniac desire of appropriating myself of seals and stamps, may I explain first the following: The most flagrant example of conceptual misuse, that leads finally to deepest confusion (as one example among many others) is the one of nobility titles in countries where there is no king anymore. As far as I understand a title is linked to a political or social organization or other, and can’t be in use anymore if the organization does not exist anymore. Thus also the national belongings and attachments. You are a soldier while you are in the army, but not when you leave the army. You are wife of … as long as you’re married, but not anymore if divorced, etc. Consequently a nobility title can only be in use in countries where the political organization allows such a title: you’ll never be a congress man if there is no congress, nor a baron if there is no king. As little will Smyrna be Turkish as Semmelweiss Hungarian, in the first case because Smyrna was a Greek town that belongs now to the Turkish state and Semmelweiss was a Jew born in the Austro-Hungarian kingdom, which is to say, of Austrian nationality and Jewish racial belonging. The same for the Turkish population in Greece which is refused them calling themselves Turkish, while passport and identity cards do allow marking in ‘katagogy’ (origin): Greek, if being of Greek origin coming from southern Albania, Georgia, Ukraine, Russia, Turkey, etc.

On this confused situation concerning identity, I built up a word game, whose immense pleasure I couldn’t hide, so that I went on making beautiful visit cards with it as understanding that the word game itself synthesized my own identity in the most precious of ways. Having heard of a legal struggle between Rothschild and a South American, whose origin I forgot, and whose country’s legislation allowed the change of name, so that he became Rothschild himself, making even a web site with this name he intended to sell when the Rothschild family claimed for the exclusive use of the name. The South American proposed 200.000 $ as being enough to give away his legal claims, which were refused to him. He finally lost the legal battle having in front about 30 of the most distinguished European lawyers. I thought that that was really funny. In Jerusalem you can find about one page in the yellow pages of little Rothschilds, as Mr. Kesdi put it, which may not have the right to have their own web page and sell it? Amused, I thought I’d make fun myself with Rothschilds just pointing at the fact that there were about 300 of them in the world and that … it was forbidden for him to use the title of Baron anyhow. I thus constructed with great happiness the ‘State Eric Baron de Rothschild’ and underlined the whole putting the famous ‘en touto nika(in hoc signo vinces: Constantine emblem in his last battle against the second remaining roman emperor before leaving Rome for Constantinople), resuming thus my complete ironical attachment to the general Babel tower we had constructed in a total confusion of words, meanings and values. This is why I never gave too much importance to assure mine through stamps and warrants: I know that what is of value is the logic that produces an object or allows a creation, and that stealing and robbing does produce gravest problem of identity as the ones thus appropriating themselves of what is not theirs can’t support the underlying logic and consequently, the fusion of both will just provoke gravest mental disorder. On the other hand it is true that if I buy a Montblanc, paying a double or triple because I think that the know how behind corresponds to consequent criteria of value and quality, I’d like it being a Montblanc and not a fake, for which I have always been deeply devoted to those organisms of state that are responsible for the actual legitimacy of an object or creation. What if some one picks my theory on symbolic logic, Sask? With me, you build the most secure electronic system of the world. With a pretender, you lose millions of investment. Mind putting bastards into prison while allowing a little space in order to have some fun with French pretenders?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: