hello list. You have probably heard of fuss over "section 92a", a proposed amendment to copyright law that would allow for your internet connection to be cut when someone says you are using it piratically. It got passed as law, put on hold, thrown out, and is now perhaps fighting its way back.
Throughout all of this ADA has had no position. It seems to me that we share considerable membership (that's you list subscribers) with the Creative Freedom Foundation who led the battle against section 92 -- but we probably also share members with APRA and SPADA who supported the proposal. So if we do take a position, it is not immediately clear what it should be. The CFF and its opponents are being terribly pragmatic and tactical in what they call for. They are fighting over what the actual law will look like, letter by letter. Personally I'm in favour of a far more anarchic situation than anything the CFF dares advocate. I understand their reasons, of course, but it makes me wonder: if ADA expresses an official opinion, should it be unashamedly fringe? Should put out press releases like they did manifestos 100 years ago? Probably nothing will come of this. I'm just curious as to whether ADA members want their trust to be making statements on stuff like this, and if so, what they want said. Douglas _______________________________________________ Ada_list mailing list [email protected] http://aotearoadigitalarts.org.nz/
