[Centre] Centre: near final draft

[Cubitt S.R.]

Newest and hopefully last v4.4

Editing is amazing

Volker: I had to change the wording of one phrase to make it fit
Now reads:

Would a return to deposit in a national library,
including detailed information concerning licensing, costs, and agents,
improve
the rights environment and trade in licenses via legal certainty for free
licensing and the public domain?


If not okay, be sure to copy Nikki Matthews Matthews N.S.
<N.S.Matthews at soton.ac.uk> in any suggestion - in an email rather than a
tracked change please!

I did some other squeezing to get into word limits

Even lost the point after Prof.
!

s





On 08/09/2011 12:49, "Volker Grassmuck" <vgrass at rz.hu-berlin.de> wrote:

>Dear all,
>
>everything is coming together nicely, analytical foundation, theory and
>practice, costings and an impressive list of partners, although "we have
>received preliminary support from” is risky if one of the readers is well
>connected with some of them and checks whether they have actually given
>preliminary support.
>
>Small, mostly cosmetic changes in the text, mostly included in previous
>ver (11-09-06_southampton copyright drafts-v3.0sc_vg.doc) but lost along
>the way. 
>
>Some more comments here:
>
>Am 07.09.2011 um 14:40 schrieb Cubitt S.R.:
>
>> I'm not sure how to process the two new comments:
>> Text: Copyright is commonly held to provide
>> incentives for authors and artists to create and for publishers
>> to identify and promote new talent and creative works.
>> 
>> comment: "Ok, I come from droit dŒauteur but to my understanding authors
>> are not entirely irrelevant in copyright either."
>> 
>> Doesn't the text already include them? (The sentence is basically one
>>sent
>> by Ed Steinmueller, if I remember)
>
>Well, authors were included after I put them there. But the edit was
>lost. Saying that copyright is there to incentivize publishers is wrong
>even in anglo-american copyright. Please, we need the authors here. See
>suggestion in text.
>
>> And your comment on prpgramme 4: this had a big edit overnight after
>> inputs form Ed and Gerhard: You say "HargreavesΠDigital Copyright
>> Exchange isnŒt primarily about CC & GPL, isnŒt it?" - does the new text
>> avoid your problem?
>
>It now reads: "Would a return to deposit in a national library, including
>detailed information concerning licensing, costs, and agents, open
>competition between copyright and alternative licensing?"
>
>GPL & CC are not competing with nor alternatives to copyright. They are a
>form of exercising copyrights. The debate about global rights
>repositories, Hargreaves’ Digital Copyright Exchange and reintroducing
>formalities is not driven by CC but by the needs of the regular rights
>trade. See suggestion in text.
>
>
>"The coincidence of digital transformation with a shift from public
>subsidy to IP-driven creative economies constitutes a large-scale,
>real-time experiment.”
>Privatization and phasing out public support for arts and culture is a
>very specific, i.e. neoliberal experiment. I don’t think we should make
>this particular political vision our own as a premise for the work of the
>Centre, which should equally take the public interest into consideration.
>See suggestion in text.
>
>
>"disparate models, including Creative Commons and Copyleft, have rarely
>been subjected to longitudinal analysis.”
>Very important point indeed. CC two years after its start noticed that
>they had missed the chance of accompanying research or even of keeping
>log files. But: The two terms are of different categories, CC is a
>concrete model while Copyleft is a general principle. Therefore I think
>it would be better to mention two other concrete models that might grow
>to have a similar impact but currently lack research: Kickstarter and
>Flattr. See suggestion in text.
>
>Just out of curiosity: In UK English „Prof.” gets a point, „Dr” doesn’t?
>
>A late reply from Bernt Hugenholtz, IvIR Amsterdam, came in, saying they
>are indirectly involved in a competing bid, so not free to join in this
>one.
>
>Apologies for late response. Hope this is still in time.
>
>A big Thank You to you, Sean. It’s been a pleasure working on this with
>all of you, and it would be great if we could build this Centre together.
>Let’s keep our fingers crossed.
>
>Best,
>Volker
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 11-09-07_southampton copyright drafts-v4.4.doc
Type: application/x-msword
Size: 78336 bytes
Desc: 11-09-07_southampton copyright drafts-v4.4.doc
Url : https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-centre/attachments/20110908/ff014037/attachment-0001.bin