Hi Andy,
I think Lawrence Lessig and Richard Stallman should think a little
more about their audience.
Yes ... we all read books and listen to music ... but a great
majority of us are also authors - we write web pages, emails, manuals,
specs, books, talks and programs (esp).
Soon enough the 'rage against the machine' rhetoric is going to
sound tired ... both Lessig and Stallman, can choose to send a more
positive message (albeit a bit boring) ... the fact is no corporation ever
had an 'idea' ... 'ideas' are the property of individuals! And
intellectual property is about protecting them.
It's what we do with IP rights that's important ... part of the
problem is letting authors know that they have power and that their
intellectual efforts can/should be rewarded!
NIge
> Lusercop wrote:
> > Yes, but a) Lawrence Lessig (Larry Lessig - we love Larrys) is a lawyer in
> > America rather than in the UK, and b) you're forgetting about the UK test
> > cases that have already happened.
>
> No, I'm not forgetting about anything. I'm paraphrasing what Larry said.
>
> My point, or rather Larry's point, is that copyright law has been subverted
> from the original intent, primarily by Disney corporation et al.
>
> In the last 70 years there have been numerous laws changed and precedents
> set on both sides of the Atlantic that have caused a gradual shift in
> copyright law from something which protects the interests of the author,
> publisher and consumer to something which mostly serves the interests
> of the publisher.
>
> According to the original intent of copyright law, the consumer was
> specifically allowed to copy a work for his own use. Copyright only
> restricted printing which in those days (1774) was the sole extent of
> publishing. Copyright lasted 14 years and creative freedom was abound.
>
> When computers came along, it should have been a non-issue that you could
> suddenly make as many perfect copies of a work as you like. Making a copy
> was expressely permitted under copyright law, only re-publishing was
> restricted.
>
> However, the publishers didn't like the idea of losing control (not just
> relating to computers, but that's obviously the key target now) so they
> successfully subverted the law to make taking a copy of a work equivalent
> to re-publishing it without paying the required licence fee.
>
> The end result is that today we have discussions about whether or not
> making a copy of a digital work in RAM counts as a breach of copyright
> or not. The answer is that yes, today it does, but that it never should
> have been like that. A system designed to regulate publishing is now used
> to regulate copying - something that can now only be achieved by draconian
> measures like DMCA, paladium, etc., because copying is so damn easy and
> convenient.
>
> The rights of consumers to use, copy and modify original works (just like
> Walt Disney when he adapted Grimm's fairy tales or parodied Buster Keaton's
> Steamboat Bill for Mickey Mouse's debut in Steamboat Willy) have been eroded
> over the last 70 years to a point where we have less freedom now than ever
> before.
>
> In short, the Disney corporation is making sure that no-one ever does
> to them what Walt Disney did to others. The term of copyright law has
> been extended 11 times in the last 40 years, coincidentally around the
> time that the copyright on the first Disney movies was about to expire.
>
> > It's all very well saying what you think should be the case.
>
> Again, I'm not saying anything, I'm repeating what Larry told me was the
> case - ours is less and less a free society.
>
> Read it in his own words:
>
> http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/policy/2002/08/15/lessig.html
>
> Then go and do something about it.
>
> > so your followup is a little misleading... you were saying what the
> > original intention of copyright was.
>
> Yes, sorry if that confused you, but I was making a sidebar point on the
> broader issues of copyright law and how we got into this sorry state. Next
> time I'll change the subject line or post it to an entirely different
> mailing list so you don't get confused by the context switch :-)
>
> A
>
>
>
--
Nigel Hamilton
Turbo10 Metasearch Engine
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel: +44 (0) 207 987 5460
fax: +44 (0) 207 987 5468
________________________________________________________________________________
http://turbo10.com Search Deeper. Browse Faster.
