Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 9th Jun 2011 18:51 UTC
Internet & Networking It's official now. The signs had been there for a while now. While the west bangs on about the importance of freedom and democracy, they don't actually want anyone to have too much of it. The US, France, and the UK have jointly pretty much declared war on freedom on the web.
Permalink for comment 476815
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Goofy duffas.
by pantheraleo on Fri 10th Jun 2011 17:29 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Goofy duffas."
pantheraleo
Member since:
2007-03-07

Sorry, but it was a troll argument.


No, it was not.

You may well be against file sharing, but I bet you have, or still do, do it.


Nope. I don't. It's not my problem whether you believe me or not. All of my music is purchased from either iTunes or Amazon. All of the software I have is legitimately licensed, or is open source. And I don't download torrents of movies.

I know very few who can who don't file-share/copy ever.


Again, whether believe me or not. I'm telling you the truth. I don't file-share / copy unless it is something that I am legally entitled to copy. As an author and developer myself, I'd be shooting myself in the foot if I supported copyright infringement.

There are definitely some blatant attempts at abusing copyright law. I agree. I'm a member of the Author's Guild. But I strongly opposed their attempts at forcing public libraries to pay royalties each time they loan a book. I saw that as highly destructive because it would have forced a lot of public libraries to close (many of which already operate on shoe-string budgets). And ensuring the children and the under-privileged have access to quality reading materials is more important than making a few extra bucks off royalties.

I also strongly opposed their legal action against Amazon when they claimed the text to speech capabilities of the Kindle violated copyright law, since I believed making more reading material accessible to the blind trumped any copyright concerns that might exist. And it was difficult me to see how the text to speech would have been harmful anyway. After all, it would have made books that weren't currently accessible to the blind much more easily accessible, and probably helped, rather than harmed sales.

So yes, I agree that there are some blatant attempts at abusing copyright law out there. But I do not think Copyleft is the answer. Almost everything that is licensed under a copyleft license really isn't all that innovative. Most of the time it just duplicates the functionality, often in a half baked way, of existing commercial copyrighted solutions. There are a few exceptions, sure. But there are very few actual "copylefted" products out there that support the idea that it fosters innovation.

Reply Parent Score: 2