Hi Rob & all,

 > Yes I agree that the ideas should be examined. I don't just disagree
 > with the Lovinks of this world on why or what or how should be "free", I
 > disagree with the Lessigs and Benklers as well. I don't even agree
 > entirely with Stallman. ;-)

I am of course, extremely thankful that Stallman exists. If him and his 
peers had not bothered with setting up the GNU Project and initiating 
the free software movement - we'd probably be communicating via a screen 
dominated by the likes of Rupert Murdoch right now.

I respect the intention and free(ing) idea behind copyleft, and I 
personally love the 'networked' reference to such licenses, also seen as 
"viral licenses". It reflects the nature of our digital culture's method 
of redistribution, sharing content, code and works across networks to 
peers, distributable platforms and portals - moving away from 
mono-cultural and sluggish centralized nodes.

 > I have many questions about free culture. Is it simply a rebranding of
 > "freedom of speech"? Is the American constitutional legal idea of
 > "protected versus commercial speech" a useful one? What is the economic
 > impact on authors of translations and artists of prints of high quality
 > website images under free licences? How do we get to and the economic
 > organization that I agree with every critic of Free Culture is still
 > sorely lacking but *without* trying to break it? Is copyleft an
 > over-reaction to the need for Fair Use?

Most of these questions you put forward seem to need actual examples to 
give them context, so that we can compare ideas, where defintions or 
suggestions can be used, explored practically.

 >Is copyleft an over-reaction to the need for Fair Use?

I may be wrong here, but I thought Fair Use was only recognised legally 
within the United Sates. Which is probably another reason why copyleft 
has been more widely taken on, because it is less bound by a single 
nation's state-law, and due to the distributable advantage and use of 
the Internet.

wishing you well.

marc


 > On 10/24/2010 05:07 PM, marc garrett wrote:
 >> Having said all this, I feel that is Geert as an individual does propose
 >> some interesting arguments. What he proposes may not necessarily sit
 >> right, but they address important questions around how and why things
 >> 'should' always be free. If we want something to be free, perhaps the
 >> motives and ideas need to be explored more regularly or more deeply,
 >> rather than everyone just accepting and adopting the idea of it as an
 >> absolute. It's a bit like accepting democracy without knowing why its
 >> there in the first place - perhaps we just need to remind ourselves why
 >> we have it.
 >
 > Yes I agree that the ideas should be examined. I don't just disagree
 > with the Lovinks of this world on why or what or how should be "free", I
 > disagree with the Lessigs and Benklers as well. I don't even agree
 > entirely with Stallman. ;-)
 >
 > I have many questions about free culture. Is it simply a rebranding of
 > "freedom of speech"? Is the American constitutional legal idea of
 > "protected versus commercial speech" a useful one? What is the economic
 > impact on authors of translations and artists of prints of high quality
 > website images under free licences? How do we get to and the economic
 > organization that I agree with every critic of Free Culture is still
 > sorely lacking but *without* trying to break it? Is copyleft an
 > over-reaction to the need for Fair Use?
 >
 > - Rob.
 > _______________________________________________
 > NetBehaviour mailing list
 > [email protected]
 > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
 >




Copyleft licenses are sometimes referred to as "viral licenses" because 
any works derived from a copyleft work must themselves be copyleft when 
distributed (and thus they exhibit a viral phenomenon). The term 
'General Public Virus', or 'GNU Public Virus' (GPV), has a long history 
on the Internet, dating back to shortly after the GPL was first conceived.[
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

Reply via email to