Dear Stuart,

I am moved by your reaction and your kind comments. Yours is an approach I could only have hoped to get as a feedback and I am thankful for it. Regarding the specific comments let me address these in turn:

1. My presentation will contain several slides and takes the issue even further than the article does, reflecting more research of the 3D printing industry I did in the meantime. The developments there are breathtaking. Now they apparently already certify 3D printed spare parts for use in avionics. Digitalization of material reality is certainly a great ITechLaw topic that goes much further than the Second life ever did and it certainly appertains to the same trend.

2. I like very much these discourses on the duration of IP rights. I feel that they are in many aspects fundamental for grasping the nature of the immaterial property (sic!-) but, with due respect, think this is discussion too complex for a conference presentation. I will work on it in the future versions of the article (book) especially as I have already developed my own take on it. I also wish to research this specifically but who knows when will I have time for this, while toiling in the private practice.

3. I have curiously overlooked the photocopiers in this paper and I thank you for noticing it. It might be that they are so ubiquitous for my generation that we are used not even noticing their impact. I still remember my fascination with the speed of the high capacity copiers I encountered in the US back in 1989 at my law school (Franklin Pierce) and back at the Fenwick copy rooms afterwards. I will definitely put something about them into the presentation, in a way of a homage to our past analogue civilization’s ability to produce copies. Again, thanks for this one.

4. No offense at all. I have lived in the States long enough to know the attitude 😉 Joking aside, it is my method to research any and all copyright systems out there. Besides knowing Croatian one rather well, it is a good example of a modern copyright system as any. Because of the Croatia’s impending accession to the EU it is one of the most modern and complete copyright laws in Europe, and just as obsolete in tackling the real issues as all of the others, UK’s new Digital Economy Act included. If you feel this section stands in the way just toss it out for the purposes of the ITechLaw Conference paper publication.

5. I am especially proud that you’ve liked the semantic slant of the article. This is actually at the core of this article as its very first version was commissioned for an art symposium on the phenomenon of artistic copies in sculpture. Once I realized that there is no way to consistently square the artistic language with the legal and make sense of it, it all took of. You’ll forgive me but I really think that many lawyers don’t know what they are talking about when they are talking about the role of copying in the creative processes. I also realized that there are very few professions that are so poor in planning for the future of their field in the social context. For your information, most of the article segments that were not yet translated are exactly devoted to the semantics of the copying terminology. The omitted topics are listed between the brackets in the last version of the article I’ve sent you and Margot.

Regarding the issues of property component in intellectual property they are already in the presentation and were the very topic of my TEDx talk last year. In short, I disagree with Richard Stallman and had an opportunity to discuss this with him and with John Perry Barlow of the EFF (Electronic Frontiers Foundation) fame in person on various occasions (in Prague and in Zagreb). I might be wrong but I had a feeling they were somewhat impatient with my arguments and brushed them aside respectfully but slightly amused with “Croatian periphery” attitude during our discussions. My feeling was that they are actually not prepared enough or too blindfolded by their own positions to consider this questions in depth and in the longer perspective our civilization needs in order to sort things right. I think their contribution to the general discussion is monumental, but remains partial and one-dimensional. I will tackle the property issue in my presentation (it is briefly mentioned in the article in an analogy to gravitation in the lest part) and thank you for putting this in focus.

So, here we are and I am thankful to ITechLaw for providing the platform for tackling this and to you personally for your generous support. Whichever comments you wish to add in your role as a moderator I will welcome. I am also prepared to take your questions as an intro to the discussions. I am proud to do be doing it together and am happy if I can contribute to ITechLaw’s leading role in the ICT community.

It does feel great to correspond in this high-brow, almost XIXish century fashion over the net. I will now move back from this Buenos Aires caffe and my iPad to my in-laws clunky but reliable desktop computer to complete the research for the presentation part. We’ll be in touch in the meantime, and I hope that by tomorrow I will be able to send you the presentation.

Best regards, Mladen