the last chance for copyright
http://falkvinge.net/2011/03/11/radical-copyright-monopoly-reform-only-chanc... (hi Chris, I'd like to reproduce this editorial in our blog as well, can you post-date it to march 21 ?) -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
ok ;-) On 11 Mar 2011, at 14:36, Michel Bauwens wrote:
http://falkvinge.net/2011/03/11/radical-copyright-monopoly-reform-only-chanc...
(hi Chris, I'd like to reproduce this editorial in our blog as well, can you post-date it to march 21 ?)
-- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/ mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
Chris Pinchen http://cataspanglish.com http://twitter.com/cataspanglish
Hi, With respect to the point that copyright may not survive if not reformed ... a similar thought was expressed by Jessica Litman in "Digital Copyright" (2001) -- that's right, 10 years ago: ============================================================= As I have watched the copyright wars intensify, however, it has seemed to me that consumers' widespread noncompliance offers a very real ray of hope. I don't expect large crowds of Napster-deprived citizens to rise up in civil disobedience against a law that they perceive as unjust--even in the post-Napster world, copyright will not be a hot issue. Instead, I expect that most people will continue to ignore a law written in barely comprehensible prose that makes no sense whatsoever from their point of view. . . People don't obey laws that they don't believe in. . .If a law is bad enough, even its proponents might be willing to abandon it in favor of a different law that seems more legitimate to the people it is intended to command. ============================================================= All the best, On 03/11/2011 02:36 PM, Michel Bauwens wrote:
http://falkvinge.net/2011/03/11/radical-copyright-monopoly-reform-only-chanc...
(hi Chris, I'd like to reproduce this editorial in our blog as well, can you post-date it to march 21 ?)
-- *ChaTo (Carlos Castillo) <http://www.chato.cl/>* /Connect: LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/chato> · Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/chato/> · Twitter <http://twitter.com/chatox>/
institutions and laws have a very long latency factor ... consider that now the overall majority of all citizens, all age groups and democrats/republicans alike, are in favour of the legalization of marihuana .. yet it could still take decades before that happens without willingness to accompany ignoring the law with an active struggle against it, the same will happen for copyright .. On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 8:48 PM, ChaTo (Carlos Alberto Alejandro CASTILLO Ocaranza) <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
With respect to the point that copyright may not survive if not reformed ... a similar thought was expressed by Jessica Litman in "Digital Copyright" (2001) -- that's right, 10 years ago:
============================================================= As I have watched the copyright wars intensify, however, it has seemed to me that consumers' widespread noncompliance offers a very real ray of hope. I don't expect large crowds of Napster-deprived citizens to rise up in civil disobedience against a law that they perceive as unjust–even in the post-Napster world, copyright will not be a hot issue. Instead, I expect that most people will continue to ignore a law written in barely comprehensible prose that makes no sense whatsoever from their point of view. . . People don't obey laws that they don't believe in. . .If a law is bad enough, even its proponents might be willing to abandon it in favor of a different law that seems more legitimate to the people it is intended to command. =============================================================
All the best,
On 03/11/2011 02:36 PM, Michel Bauwens wrote:
http://falkvinge.net/2011/03/11/radical-copyright-monopoly-reform-only-chanc...
(hi Chris, I'd like to reproduce this editorial in our blog as well, can you post-date it to march 21 ?)
-- *ChaTo (Carlos Castillo) <http://www.chato.cl/>* *Connect: LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/in/chato>· Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/chato/> · Twitter<http://twitter.com/chatox> *
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
-- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 8:09 AM, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:
institutions and laws have a very long latency factor ...
consider that now the overall majority of all citizens, all age groups and democrats/republicans alike, are in favour of the legalization of marihuana .. yet it could still take decades before that happens
without willingness to accompany ignoring the law with an active struggle against it, the same will happen for copyright ..
I think ignoring the law and developing countermeasures against enforcement are a much more cost-effective use of resources than political action to repeal it. As far as I know, nobody ever repealed the Code of Hammurabi. An unenforceable law is as good as no law at all. http://radgeek.com/gt/2009/02/07/countereconomic_optimism/ "If you want to see copyright restrictions liberalized, then it may be true that the words on a page in Washington are worse than they’ve ever been; but the facts on the ground are perhaps better than they’ve been at any other time in the history of the United States. And while there is no hope for revising those words for the better any time soon, the facts are changing for the better every day, all their lawyers and their lobbyists and their intergovernmental treaties notwithstanding — they are improving daily as technical problems are solved, as new sharing networks emerge, and as the problem of even identifying the competition, let alone shutting them down, becomes more and more overwhelming for the copyrightists’ rear-guard legal strategy. "Why despair, or even care about the legal situation at all, if the practical situation makes the law irrelevant? A law that cannot be enforced is as good as a a law that has been repealed, and that is where we’re headed, faster and faster every day, when it comes to the intellectual monopolists and their jealously guarded legal privileges." I argued here <http://c4ss.org/content/5845> that, in John Robb's terminology, enforcement is state capitalism's Systempunkt. Actually contesting the plutocrats and big business for control of the state would be enormously costly, a sisyphean task of endless procedural steps in which we're outspent 100-to-1 by the plutes and the rules are rigged in their favor at every single step. But enforcement is the weakest link, and devoting a hundredth the resources to disabling that node can have the same effect in terms of rendering the system inoperable that capturing the system would have. Just as, by way of analogy, Al Qaeda can shut down an entire oil distribution system by disabling a few key nodes, achieving for a few hundred dollars worth of explosives the same result that would require thousands of strategic bombing sorties to destroy the entire physical pipeline infrastructure. Why waste resources in the moral equivalent of house-to-house fighting to secure control of the state when we can simply throw sand in its gears? -- Kevin Carson Center for a Stateless Society http://c4ss.org Mutualist Blog: Free Market Anti-Capitalism http://mutualist.blogspot.com The Homebrew Industrial Revolution: A Low-Overhead Manifesto http://homebrewindustrialrevolution.wordpress.com Organization Theory: A Libertarian Perspective http://mutualist.blogspot.com/2005/12/studies-in-anarchist-theory-of.html
hi Kevin, can I publish this on the blog? Michel On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Kevin Carson < [email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 8:09 AM, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:
institutions and laws have a very long latency factor ...
consider that now the overall majority of all citizens, all age groups and democrats/republicans alike, are in favour of the legalization of marihuana .. yet it could still take decades before that happens
without willingness to accompany ignoring the law with an active struggle against it, the same will happen for copyright ..
I think ignoring the law and developing countermeasures against enforcement are a much more cost-effective use of resources than political action to repeal it. As far as I know, nobody ever repealed the Code of Hammurabi. An unenforceable law is as good as no law at all.
http://radgeek.com/gt/2009/02/07/countereconomic_optimism/ "If you want to see copyright restrictions liberalized, then it may be true that the words on a page in Washington are worse than they’ve ever been; but the facts on the ground are perhaps better than they’ve been at any other time in the history of the United States. And while there is no hope for revising those words for the better any time soon, the facts are changing for the better every day, all their lawyers and their lobbyists and their intergovernmental treaties notwithstanding — they are improving daily as technical problems are solved, as new sharing networks emerge, and as the problem of even identifying the competition, let alone shutting them down, becomes more and more overwhelming for the copyrightists’ rear-guard legal strategy.
"Why despair, or even care about the legal situation at all, if the practical situation makes the law irrelevant? A law that cannot be enforced is as good as a a law that has been repealed, and that is where we’re headed, faster and faster every day, when it comes to the intellectual monopolists and their jealously guarded legal privileges."
I argued here <http://c4ss.org/content/5845> that, in John Robb's terminology, enforcement is state capitalism's Systempunkt. Actually contesting the plutocrats and big business for control of the state would be enormously costly, a sisyphean task of endless procedural steps in which we're outspent 100-to-1 by the plutes and the rules are rigged in their favor at every single step. But enforcement is the weakest link, and devoting a hundredth the resources to disabling that node can have the same effect in terms of rendering the system inoperable that capturing the system would have. Just as, by way of analogy, Al Qaeda can shut down an entire oil distribution system by disabling a few key nodes, achieving for a few hundred dollars worth of explosives the same result that would require thousands of strategic bombing sorties to destroy the entire physical pipeline infrastructure. Why waste resources in the moral equivalent of house-to-house fighting to secure control of the state when we can simply throw sand in its gears?
-- Kevin Carson Center for a Stateless Society http://c4ss.org Mutualist Blog: Free Market Anti-Capitalism http://mutualist.blogspot.com The Homebrew Industrial Revolution: A Low-Overhead Manifesto http://homebrewindustrialrevolution.wordpress.com Organization Theory: A Libertarian Perspective http://mutualist.blogspot.com/2005/12/studies-in-anarchist-theory-of.html
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
-- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
On 3/11/11, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:
hi Kevin,
can I publish this on the blog?
Sure! And thanks. -- Kevin Carson Center for a Stateless Society http://c4ss.org Mutualist Blog: Free Market Anti-Capitalism http://mutualist.blogspot.com The Homebrew Industrial Revolution: A Low-Overhead Manifesto http://homebrewindustrialrevolution.wordpress.com Organization Theory: A Libertarian Perspective http://mutualist.blogspot.com/2005/12/studies-in-anarchist-theory-of.html
thanks Kevin, for the 20th! On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Kevin Carson < [email protected]> wrote:
On 3/11/11, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:
hi Kevin,
can I publish this on the blog?
Sure! And thanks.
-- Kevin Carson Center for a Stateless Society http://c4ss.org Mutualist Blog: Free Market Anti-Capitalism http://mutualist.blogspot.com The Homebrew Industrial Revolution: A Low-Overhead Manifesto http://homebrewindustrialrevolution.wordpress.com Organization Theory: A Libertarian Perspective http://mutualist.blogspot.com/2005/12/studies-in-anarchist-theory-of.html
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
-- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
participants (4)
-
ChaTo (Carlos Alberto Alejandro CASTILLO Ocaranza) -
Chris Pinchen -
Kevin Carson -
Michel Bauwens