links for 2007-05-31

One reply on “links for 2007-05-31”

Tim Wu is basically supporting the ridiculous notion that because authors can be beneficient in restoring the public’s liberty, that it is therefore right and just that it is the author that does this, i.e. that the public’s liberty should indeed be suspended to be made the gift of the author because it requires the wisdom of the author in determining whether they should have it back – and of course, authors are invariably beneficient and wise.
I wonder about that vastness of would be authors among the public who are similarly beneficient and wise and able to make their own decisions regarding their liberty were it not suspended – their cultural freedom to share, interpret or build upon the published works of other authors.
Ahem. The public now have their liberty back and are enjoying it quite happily thank you. The problem is authors and their agents prosecuting them for this. If anything, Creative commons helps the author and their agent make it clear who they will still attempt to prosecute and who they’ve realised they should no longer attempt to prosecute (for enjoying cultural freedom). CC is not the entity that has liberated the public, nor should it attempt to obtain credit for it, it is the Internet and information technology. CC simply helps a copyright holder avoid a bad reputation for prosecuting their customers for the liberties they take – it doesn’t transform copyright into a tool of liberation.
Wise and beneficient authors will nullify their copyright entirely, and appeal for copyright’s abolition.

Comments are closed.