Felix Stalder wrote:
> In this view, copyfights appear to articulate
> a "secondary contradiction" within capitalism, which cannot solved as long
> as the main contradition, that between labor and capital, is not
> redressed.
>
> Is that it?
Hello Felix, that is more or less it, yes, free culture
Hi,
I guess the point is that if you are an author, who is willing to
accept money for a work that is offered by someone, who is willing to
pay for the work is counter-revolutionary. :))
If that was not true, then the author wouldn't have had any problem with
markets for cultural goods (aka comme
Apropos of Anna Nimus's text,
Felix Stalder wrote:
"Which seems to leave as the conclusion that within capitalism the
structure of copyright, or IP more generally, doesn't really matter,
because it either supports directly fundamentally-flawed notions
of property (à la CC), or it does not prevent
>Copyright, Copyleft and the Creative Anti-Commons
>Anna Nimus (http://subsol.c3.hu/subsol_2/contributors0/nimustext.html)
>
>> A Genealogy of Authors' Property Rights
An interesting article, although I don't agree with its (implied) conclusions.
>The author has not always existed. The image
I'm not sure I understand the main thrust of the argument.
On the one hand, GPL-type copyleft is criticized for not preventing the
appropriation (or, more precisely, use) of code by commercial, capitalist
interests. These still manage to move profits from labor (employees /
contractors who are
