diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'examples/blog/articles/scrap1_20.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | examples/blog/articles/scrap1_20.html | 270 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 270 deletions
diff --git a/examples/blog/articles/scrap1_20.html b/examples/blog/articles/scrap1_20.html deleted file mode 100644 index 0f09d8dd..00000000 --- a/examples/blog/articles/scrap1_20.html +++ /dev/null @@ -1,270 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd"> -<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman. - -Free Software Foundation - -51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor - -Boston, MA 02110-1335 -Copyright C 2002, 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc. -Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire book are permitted -worldwide, without royalty, in any medium, provided this notice is -preserved. Permission is granted to copy and distribute translations -of this book from the original English into another language provided -the translation has been approved by the Free Software Foundation and -the copyright notice and this permission notice are preserved on all -copies. - -ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9 -Cover design by Rob Myers. - -Cover photograph by Peter Hinely. - --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82 -texi2html was written by: - Lionel Cons <Lionel.Cons@cern.ch> (original author) - Karl Berry <karl@freefriends.org> - Olaf Bachmann <obachman@mathematik.uni-kl.de> - and many others. -Maintained by: Many creative people. -Send bugs and suggestions to <texi2html-bug@nongnu.org> ---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 20. Freedom—or Copyright</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 20. Freedom—or Copyright"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution" content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><style type="text/css"> -<!-- -a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none} -blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller} -pre.display {font-family: serif} -pre.format {font-family: serif} -pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif} -pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif} -pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller} -pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller} -pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller} -pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller} -span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;} -span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;} -ul.toc {list-style: none} ---> -</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article"> - -<a name="Freedom-or-Copyright"></a> -<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../gnu.svg" height="100" width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Freedom_002d_002d_002dor-Copyright"></a> -<h1 class="chapter"> 20. Freedom—or Copyright </h1> - - -<blockquote class="smallquotation"><p>This essay addresses how the principles of software freedom apply in -some cases to other works of authorship and art. It’s included here -since it involves the application of the ideas of free software. -</p></blockquote> -<br><p>Copyright was established in the age of the printing press as an -industrial regulation on the business of writing and publishing. The -aim was to encourage the publication of a diversity of written works. -The means was to require publishers to get the author’s permission to -publish recent writings. This enabled authors to get income from -publishers, which facilitated and encouraged writing. The general -reading public received the benefit of this, while losing little: -copyright restricted only publication, not the things an ordinary -reader could do. That made copyright arguably a beneficial system for -the public, and therefore arguably legitimate. -</p> -<p>Well and good—back then. -</p> -<p>Now we have a new way of distributing information: computers and -networks. Their benefit is that they facilitate copying and -manipulating information, including software, musical recordings, -books, and movies. They offer the possibility of unlimited access to -all sorts of data—an information utopia. -</p> -<p>One obstacle stood in the way: copyright. Readers and listeners who -made use of their new ability to copy and share published information -were technically copyright infringers. The same law which had -formerly acted as a beneficial industrial regulation on publishers had -become a restriction on the public it was meant to serve. -</p> -<p>In a democracy, a law that prohibits a popular and useful activity is -usually soon relaxed. Not so where corporations have political power. -The publishers’ lobby was determined to prevent the public from taking -advantage of the power of their computers, and found copyright a -handy weapon. Under their influence, rather than relaxing copyright -rules to suit the new circumstances, governments made them stricter than -ever, imposing harsh penalties on the practice of sharing. The latest -fashion in supporting the publishers against the citizens, known as -“three strikes,” is to cut off people’s Internet connections if -they share. -</p> -<p>But that wasn’t the worst of it. Computers can be powerful tools of -domination when software suppliers deny users the control of the -software they run. The -publishers realized that by publishing works in encrypted format, -which only specially authorized software could view, they could gain -unprecedented power: they could compel readers to pay, and identify -themselves, every time they read a book, listen to a song, or watch a -video. That is the publishers’ dream: a -<a name="index-pay_002dper_002dview"></a> -pay-per-view universe. -</p> -<a name="index-DMCA_002c-publishers-and-1"></a> -<p>The publishers gained US government support for their dream with the -Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998. This law gave publishers -power to write their own copyright rules, by implementing them in the -code of the authorized player software. Under this practice, called -Digital Restrictions Management, or -<a name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-1"></a> -DRM, even reading or listening -without authorization is forbidden. -</p> -<a name="index-e_002dbooks-2"></a> -<p>We still have the same old freedoms in using paper books and other -analog media. But if e-books replace printed books, those freedoms -will not transfer. Imagine: no more used book stores; no more lending -a book to your friend; no more borrowing one from the public -<a name="index-libraries_002c-e_002dbooks-and-1"></a> -library—no more “leaks” that might give someone a -chance to read without paying. No more purchasing a book anonymously with -cash—you can only buy an e-book with a credit card. That is -the world the publishers want to impose on us. If you buy the -<a name="index-Amazon"></a> -Amazon -<a name="index-Kindle-_0028see-also-Swindle_0029"></a> -Kindle (we call it the -<a name="index-Swindle"></a> -Swindle) or the -<a name="index-Sony-Reader-_0028call-it-the-Shreader_0029"></a> -Sony Reader (we -call it the Shreader for what it threatens to do to books), you pay to -establish that world. -</p> -<p>The -<a name="index-Swindle-1"></a> -Swindle even has an Orwellian back door that can be used to erase -books remotely. Amazon demonstrated this capability by erasing -copies, purchased from Amazon, of -<a name="index-Orwell_002c-George"></a> -Orwell’s book -<a name="index-1984_002c-George-Orwell"></a> -<cite>1984.</cite> Evidently -Amazon’s name for this product reflects the intention to burn our -books. -</p> -<p>Public anger against DRM is slowly growing, held back because -propaganda expressions such -as -<a name="index-_0060_0060protection_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-1"></a> -“protect -authors” -and -<a name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-7"></a> -“intellectual -property” have convinced readers that their rights do not -count. These terms implicitly assume that publishers deserve special -power in the name of the authors, that we are morally obliged to bow -to them, and that we have wronged someone if we see or hear -anything without paying for permission. -</p> -<p>The organizations that profit most from copyright legally exercise it -in the name of the authors (most of whom gain little). They would -have you believe that copyright is a natural right of authors, and -that we the public must suffer it no matter how painful it is. They -call sharing -<a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-7"></a> -“piracy,” equating helping your neighbor with -attacking a ship. -</p> -<a name="index-War-on-Sharing-_0028see-also-DRM-and-copyright_0029"></a> -<p>They also tell us that a War on Sharing is the only way to keep -art alive. Even if true, it would not justify the policy; but it -isn’t true. Public sharing of copies is likely to increase the sales of -most works, and decrease sales only for big hits. -</p> -<a name="index-e_002dbooks-3"></a> -<p>Bestsellers can still do well without forbidding sharing. -<a name="index-King_002c-Stephen"></a> -Stephen -King got hundreds of thousands of dollars selling an unencrypted -e-book serial with no obstacle to copying and sharing. (He was -dissatisfied with that amount and called the experiment a failure, but it looks -like a success to me.) -<a name="index-Radiohead"></a> -Radiohead made millions in 2007 by inviting -fans to copy an album and pay what they wished, while it was also -shared through -<a name="index-peer_002dto_002dpeer"></a> -peer-to-peer. In -2008, -<a name="index-Nine-Inch-Nails"></a> -Nine Inch Nails released an album with permission to share copies and -made $750,000 in a few days.<a name="DOCF43" href="#FOOT43">(43)</a> -</p> -<p>The possibility of success without oppression is not limited to -bestsellers. Many artists of various levels of fame now make an -adequate living through voluntary support:<a name="DOCF44" href="#FOOT44">(44)</a> -donations and merchandise purchases of their fans. -<a name="index-Kelly_002c-Kevin"></a> -Kevin Kelly<a name="DOCF45" href="#FOOT45">(45)</a> estimates the artist need -only find around 1,000 true fans.<a name="DOCF46" href="#FOOT46">(46)</a> -</p> -<p>When computer networks provide an easy anonymous method for sending -someone a small amount of money, without a credit card, it will be -easy to set up a much better system to support the arts. When you -view a work, there will be a button you can press saying, “Click -here to send the artist one dollar.” Wouldn’t you press it, at -least once a week? -</p> -<p>Another good way to support music and the arts is with -tax funds—perhaps a tax on blank media -or on Internet connectivity. The state should -distribute the tax money entirely to the artists, not -waste it on corporate executives. But the state should not distribute -it in linear proportion to popularity, because that would give most of -it to a few superstars, leaving little to support all the other -artists. I therefore recommend using a cube-root function or -something similar. With linear proportion, superstar A with 1,000 -times the popularity of a successful artist B will get 1,000 times as -much money as B. With the cube root, A will get 10 times as much as -B. Thus, each superstar gets a larger share than a less popular -artist, but most of the funds go to the artists who really need this -support. This system will use our tax money efficiently to support -the arts. -</p> -<a name="index-Global-Patronage-_0028see-also-DRM-and-copyright_0029"></a> -<p>The Global Patronage<a name="DOCF47" href="#FOOT47">(47)</a> proposal -combines aspects of those two systems, incorporating mandatory -payments with voluntary allocation among artists. -</p> -<a name="index-Spain-1"></a> -<p>In Spain, this tax system should replace the -<a name="index-SGAE"></a> -SGAE<a name="DOCF48" href="#FOOT48">(48)</a> and its canon, -which could be eliminated. -</p> -<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-boycott-products-with-DRM"></a> -<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-legalize-noncommercial-copying-and-sharing-of-all-published-works"></a> -<p>To make copyright fit the network age, we should legalize the -noncommercial copying and sharing of all published works, and prohibit -DRM. But until we win this battle, you must protect yourself: don’t -buy any products with DRM unless you personally have the means to -break the DRM. Never use a product designed to attack your freedom -unless you can nullify the attack. -<a name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-2"></a> -</p><div class="footnote"> -<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3> -<h3><a name="FOOT43" href="#DOCF43">(43)</a></h3> -<p>“Nine Inch Nails Made at Least $750k from CC Release in Two Days,” posted by Cory Doctorow, 5 March 2008, -<a href="http://boingboing.net/2008/03/05/nine-inch-nails-made.html">http://boingboing.net/2008/03/05/nine-inch-nails-made.html</a>. -</p><h3><a name="FOOT44" href="#DOCF44">(44)</a></h3> -<p>Mike Masnick, -“The Future of Music Business Models (and Those Who Are Already -There),” 25 January 2010, -<a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20091119/1634117011.shtml">http://techdirt.com/articles/20091119/1634117011.shtml</a>. -</p><h3><a name="FOOT45" href="#DOCF45">(45)</a></h3> -<p>Kevin Kelly is a commentator on digital culture -and the founder of <cite>Wired</cite> magazine. -</p><h3><a name="FOOT46" href="#DOCF46">(46)</a></h3> -<p>Kevin Kelly, “1,000 True -Fans,” 4 March 2008, -<a href="http://kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2008/03/1000_true_fans.php">http://kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2008/03/1000_true_fans.php</a>. -</p><h3><a name="FOOT47" href="#DOCF47">(47)</a></h3> -<p>See <a href="http://mecenatglobal.org/">http://mecenatglobal.org/</a> for more information. -</p><h3><a name="FOOT48" href="#DOCF48">(48)</a></h3> -<p>The SGAE is Spain’s main copyright collective for composers, authors, -and publishers. -</p></div> -<hr size="2"></section></body></html> |