Richard Stallman - "Copyright vs. Community" Feb. 2, 2009
0 Freedom to run program
1 Freedom to study source code
2 Freedom to distribute software
3 Freedom to contribute to the community
- its social system is ethical
- proprietary is unethical
What should copyright law let you do? (age of printing press vs digital age) - spent a while discussing the history and evolution of copyright
- copyright is no longer a industrial regulation
- reduce copyright power
- copyright should be much shorter - stallman suggests 10 years from date of publication (more than 3 times the publication cycle)
What copyright should cover?
Type of works:
- works of practical use - these works must be free, when you use these works to do your job, you do not have control over your life
- free to publish your own version... this includes software
- works of reference
- educational (text books)
- works of testimony (opinion) - commercial use and modification require permission, non-commercial free to share exact copies
- works of art & entertainment
- modification can destroy artistic integrity, or it can be a contribution to art
- [shakespeare would have violated copyright]
- commercial use and modification require permission, non-commercial free to share exact copies [same 10 years]
- All copyrighted works must be shareable - to try and stop it, is an attack on society
- Governments are abandoning all sense of justice in prosecuting offenders
- A system that supports artists better
- A tax - distributed to artists [based on popularity in a non-linear way (take the cubed root of artists popularity)] THE GOAL IS TO SUPPORT THE ARTS
- voluntary payments - sent directly to the artists ["people are not the greedy bastards that economists claim that they are!"]
- A friendly and kind PR campaign, don't accuse the public of piracy, "did you band a band this week ;)"
DRM attacks freedom
- takes away your legal rights to use the works
- publish the works in a secret format, so that only proprietary software can play it
- AACS (Blue ray) is absolutely evil. Sony PS3
intellectual property is a ridiculous term, it confusing copyright, trademark, patent, and many other laws, each needs to be approached independently