diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/copyright-and-globalization.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/copyright-and-globalization.html | 135 |
1 files changed, 71 insertions, 64 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/copyright-and-globalization.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/copyright-and-globalization.html index 70b46e9..2d8681b 100644 --- a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/copyright-and-globalization.html +++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/copyright-and-globalization.html @@ -1,28 +1,35 @@ <!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" --> -<!-- Parent-Version: 1.86 --> +<!-- Parent-Version: 1.96 --> +<!-- This page is derived from /server/standards/boilerplate.html --> +<!--#set var="TAGS" value="speeches" --> +<!--#set var="DISABLE_TOP_ADDENDUM" value="yes" --> <title>Copyright and Globalization in the Age of Computer Networks - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title> <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/copyright-and-globalization.translist" --> <!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" --> +<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" --> +<!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE--> +<!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" --> +<div class="article reduced-width"> <h2>Copyright and Globalization in the Age of Computer Networks</h2> -<p> -<i>The following is an edited transcript from a speech given +<div class="infobox"> +<p>The following is an edited transcript from a speech given at <abbr title="Massachusetts Institute of Technology">MIT</abbr> in -the Communications Forum on Thursday, April 19, 2001 from 5:00pm - -7:00pm</i></p> +the Communications Forum on Thursday, April 19, 2001.</p> +</div> +<hr class="thin" /> <p> <b>DAVID THORBURN, moderator</b>: Our speaker today, Richard Stallman, is a legendary figure in the computing world, and my experience in trying to find a respondent to share the podium with him was -instructive. One distinguished <abbr>MIT</abbr> professor told me +instructive. One distinguished MIT professor told me that Stallman needs to be understood as a charismatic figure in a -biblical parable — a kind of Old Testament anecdote-lesson. -“Imagine,” he said, “a Moses or a Jeremiah — -better a Jeremiah.” And I said, “Well, that's very -admirable.”</p> -<p> +biblical parable—a kind of Old Testament anecdote-lesson. +“Imagine,” he said, “a Moses or a Jeremiah—better +a Jeremiah.” And I said, “Well, that's very +admirable. That sounds wonderful. It confirms my sense of the kind of contribution he has made to the world. Then why are you reluctant to share the podium with him?” His answer: “Like Jeremiah or @@ -63,7 +70,7 @@ free?”</p> Well, what does that mean? Should you be free to copy it and change it? Well, as for changing it, if you buy the microphone, nobody is going to stop you from changing it. And as for copying it, nobody has -a microphone copier. Outside of “Star Trek,” those things +a microphone copier. Outside of <cite>Star Trek</cite>, those things don't exist. Maybe some day there'll be nanotechnological analyzers and assemblers, and it really will be possible to copy a physical object, and then these issues of whether you're free to do that will @@ -101,8 +108,8 @@ They knew, say, that this play was written by Sophocles but in between writing a book and copying a book, there were other useful things you could do. For instance, you could copy a part of a book, then write some new words, copy some more and write some new words and on and on. -This was called “writing a commentary” — that was a -common thing to do — and these commentaries were +This was called “writing a commentary”—that was a +common thing to do—and these commentaries were appreciated.</p> <p> You could also copy a passage out of one book, then write some other @@ -192,8 +199,8 @@ the benefit of more books' being written and published.</p> <p> Now, is this an advantageous trade? Well, when the general public can't make copies because they can only be efficiently made on -printing presses — and most people don't own printing presses -— the result is that the general public is trading away a +printing presses—and most people don't own printing presses—the +result is that the general public is trading away a freedom it is unable to exercise, a freedom that is of no practical value. So if you have something that is a byproduct of your life and it's useless and you have the opportunity to exchange it for something @@ -229,8 +236,8 @@ computer, the publishers consider restricting you to be their highest priority. Copyright was easy to enforce because it was a restriction only on publishers who were easy to find and what they published was easy to see. Now the copyright is a restriction on each and everyone -of you. To enforce it requires surveillance — an intrusion -— and harsh punishments, and we are seeing these being enacted +of you. To enforce it requires surveillance—an intrusion—and +harsh punishments, and we are seeing these being enacted into law in the U.S. and other countries.</p> <p> And copyright used to be, arguably, an advantageous trade for the @@ -265,7 +272,7 @@ maybe it would take 10 or 20 years before we all switched to e-books. Clearly, this kind of campaign comes from somebody paying for it. Now why are they doing that? I think I know. The reason is that e-books are the opportunity to take away some of the residual freedoms that -readers of printed books have always had and still have — the +readers of printed books have always had and still have—the freedom, for instance, to lend a book to your friend or borrow it from the public library or sell a copy to a used bookstore or buy a copy anonymously, without putting a record in the database of who bought @@ -286,8 +293,8 @@ taken away and when they might have fought back to retain them.</p> <p> We see at the same time efforts to take away people's freedom in using other kinds of published works. For instance, movies that are on DVDs -are published in an encrypted format that used to be secret — it -was meant to be secret — and the only way the movie companies +are published in an encrypted format that used to be secret—it +was meant to be secret—and the only way the movie companies would tell you the format, so that you could make a DVD player, was if you signed a contract to build certain restrictions into the player, with the result that the public would be stopped even from fully @@ -316,8 +323,8 @@ not surprising when you consider why the Digital Millennium Copyright Act was passed in the first place. The reason is the campaign finance system that we have in the U.S., which is essentially legalized bribery where the candidates are bought by business before they even -get elected. And, of course, they know who their master is — -they know whom they're working for — and they pass the laws to +get elected. And, of course, they know who their master is—they +know whom they're working for—and they pass the laws to give business more power.</p> <p> What will happen with that particular battle, we don't know. But @@ -329,14 +336,14 @@ distributing information that's been published.</p> <p> The U.S. though is not the first country to make a priority of this. The Soviet Union treated it as very important. There this -unauthorized copying and redistribution was known as Samizdat and to +unauthorized copying and redistribution was known as <i>samizdat</i> and to stamp it out, they developed a series of methods: First, guards watching every piece of copying equipment to check what people were copying to prevent forbidden copying. Second, harsh punishments for anyone caught doing forbidden copying. You could be sent to Siberia. Third, soliciting informers, asking everyone to rat on their neighbors and co-workers to the information police. Fourth, collective -responsibility — You! You're going to watch that group! If I +responsibility—You! You're going to watch that group! If I catch any of them doing forbidden copying, you are going to prison. So watch them hard. And, fifth, propaganda, starting in childhood to convince everyone that only a horrible enemy of the people would ever @@ -429,7 +436,7 @@ interfering with their profits in the other country. So foreign companies have more power than citizens of the country.</p> <p> There are attempts being made to extend this -beyond <abbr>NAFTA</abbr>. For instance, this is one of the goals of +beyond NAFTA. For instance, this is one of the goals of the so-called free trade area of the Americas, to extend this principle to all the countries in South America and the Caribbean as well, and the multilateral agreement on investment was intended to @@ -543,24 +550,24 @@ works is not a socially useful activity. And so verbatim copying is the only thing that people really need to be allowed to do.</p> <p> The next question is: Should people have the right to do commercial -verbatim copying? Or is non-commercial enough? You see, these are +verbatim copying? Or is noncommercial enough? You see, these are two different activities we can distinguish, so that we can consider -the questions separately — the right to do non-commercial +the questions separately—the right to do noncommercial verbatim copying and the right to do commercial verbatim copying. Well, it might be a good compromise policy to have copyright cover commercial verbatim copying but allow everyone the right to do -non-commercial verbatim copying. This way, the copyright on the -commercial verbatim copying, as well as on all modified versions -— only the author could approve a modified version — would +noncommercial verbatim copying. This way, the copyright on the +commercial verbatim copying, as well as on all modified versions—only +the author could approve a modified version—would still provide the same revenue stream that it provides now to fund the writing of these works, to whatever extent it does.</p> <p> -By allowing the non-commercial verbatim copying, it means the +By allowing the noncommercial verbatim copying, it means the copyright no longer has to intrude into everybody's home. It becomes an industrial regulation again, easy to enforce and painless, no longer requiring draconian punishments and informers for the sake of -its enforcement. So we get most of the benefit — and avoid most -of the horror — of the current system.</p> +its enforcement. So we get most of the benefit—and avoid most +of the horror—of the current system.</p> <p> The third category of works is aesthetic or entertaining works, where the most important thing is just the sensation of looking at the @@ -621,7 +628,7 @@ the sale. The same publishers that are demanding total power over the public in the name of the authors and musicians are giving those authors and musicians the shaft all the time.</p> <p> -I recommend you read Courtney Love's article in “Salon” +I recommend you read Courtney Love's article in <cite>Salon</cite> magazine, an article about pirates that plan to use musicians' work without paying them. These pirates are the record companies that pay musicians 4% of the sales figures, on the average. Of course, the @@ -805,7 +812,7 @@ participating, it might work.</p> The other thing is, we do not have this digital cash payment system; so we can't really try it today. You could try to do something a little bit like it. There are services you can sign up for where you -can pay money to someone — things like PayPal. But before you +can pay money to someone—things like PayPal. But before you can pay anyone through PayPal, you have to go through a lot of rigmarole and give them personal information about you, and they collect records of whom you pay. Can you trust them not to misuse @@ -826,7 +833,7 @@ copy the tapes. They didn't even lose their record sales.</p> We are gradually moving from the age of the printing press to the age of the computer network, but it's not happening in a day. People are still buying lots of records, and that will probably continue for many -years — maybe forever. As long as that continues, simply having +years—maybe forever. As long as that continues, simply having copyrights that still apply to commercial sales of records ought to do about as good a job of supporting musicians as it does today. Of course, that's not very good, but, at least, it won't get any @@ -853,9 +860,9 @@ this.”</p> Well, clearly, that's not the way to make the public feel like sending you money. You've got to make them love you, not fear you.</p> <p> -<b>SPEAKER</b>: The details were that he required a certain percentage -— I don't know the exact percentage, around 90% sounds correct -— of people to send a certain amount of money, which, I believe, +<b>SPEAKER</b>: The details were that he required a certain percentage—I +don't know the exact percentage, around 90% sounds correct—of +people to send a certain amount of money, which, I believe, was a dollar or two dollars, or somewhere in that order of magnitude. You had to type in your name and your e-mail address and some other information to get to download it and if that percentage of people was @@ -869,7 +876,7 @@ plagiarizing?</p> <p> <b>STALLMAN</b>: No. That's not what I proposed. Remember, I'm proposing that there should be copyright covering commercial distribution and -permitting only verbatim redistribution non-commercially. So anyone +permitting only verbatim redistribution noncommercially. So anyone who modified it to put in a pointer to his website, instead of a pointer to the real author's website, would still be infringing the copyright and could be sued exactly as he could be sued today.</p> @@ -884,8 +891,8 @@ copyright powers, not abolish them.</p> <b>THORBURN</b>: I guess one question that occurred to me while you were speaking, Richard, and, again, now when you're responding here to this question is why you don't consider the ways in which the -computer, itself, eliminates the middle men completely — in the -way that Stephen King refused to do — and might establish a +computer, itself, eliminates the middle men completely—in the +way that Stephen King refused to do—and might establish a personal relationship.</p> <p> <b>STALLMAN</b>: Well, they can and, in fact, this voluntary donation @@ -989,7 +996,7 @@ economy and the laws. So, in effect, it's a chicken-or-the-egg problem, you know. Which do we do first? How do we get the world where people don't have to desperately get money except by removing the control by business? And how can we remove the control by -business except — Anyway, I don't know, but that's why I'm +business except—Anyway, I don't know, but that's why I'm trying to propose first a compromise copyright system and, second, the voluntary payment supported by a compromise copyright system as a way to provide a revenue stream to the people who write those works.</p> @@ -1035,7 +1042,7 @@ teacher of media, my access to images has been restricted in recent years in a way that had never been in place before. If I write an essay in which I want to use still images, even from films, they are much harder to get permission to use, and the prices charged to use -those still images are much higher — even when I make arguments +those still images are much higher—even when I make arguments about intellectual inquiry and the legal category of “fair use.” So I think, in this moment of extended transformation, the longer-term prospects may, in fact, not be as disturbing as what's @@ -1079,7 +1086,7 @@ machine. So maybe that's what affected their thinking.</p> care to lay out for us?</p> <p> <b>STALLMAN</b>: Well, the idea of giving everyone permission for -non-commercial verbatim copying of two kinds of works, certainly, may +noncommercial verbatim copying of two kinds of works, certainly, may be thought of as extending what fair use is. It's bigger than what's fair use currently. If your idea is that the public trades away certain freedoms to get more progress, then you can draw the line at @@ -1091,18 +1098,18 @@ entertainment fields, we have the concept of a public presentation. So, for example, copyright does not prevent us from singing Christmas carols seasonally but it prevents the public performance. And I'm wondering if it might be useful to think about instead of expanding -fair use to unlimited, non-commercial, verbatim copying, to something +fair use to unlimited, noncommercial, verbatim copying, to something less than that but more than the present concept of fair use.</p> <p> <b>STALLMAN</b>: I used to think that that might be enough, and then Napster convinced me otherwise because Napster is used by its users for -non-commercial, verbatim redistribution. The Napster server, itself, +noncommercial, verbatim redistribution. The Napster server, itself, is a commercial activity but the people who are actually putting -things up are doing so non-commercially, and they could have done so +things up are doing so noncommercially, and they could have done so on their websites just as easily. The tremendous excitement about, interest in, and use of Napster shows that that's very useful. So I'm convinced now that people should have the right to publicly -non-commercially, redistributed, verbatim copies of everything.</p> +noncommercially, redistributed, verbatim copies of everything.</p> <p> <b>QUESTION</b>: One analogy that was recently suggested to me for the whole Napster question was the analogy of the public library. I @@ -1149,7 +1156,7 @@ So that's a tremendously important issue, but it's a totally different issue. There's just one area where an issue arises with patents that is actually similar to these issues of freedom to copy, and that is in the area of agriculture. Because there are certain patented things -that can be copies, more or less — namely, living things. They +that can be copies, more or less—namely, living things. They copy themselves when they reproduce. It's not necessarily exact copying; they re-shuffle the genes. But the fact is, farmers for millennia have been making use of this capacity of the living things @@ -1191,8 +1198,8 @@ This tremendously boosts it. But I don't know how much it will work in various different areas, but I think that in the area of education, when you're looking for textbooks, I think I see a way it can be done. There are a lot of teachers in the world, teachers who are not at -prestigious universities — maybe they're in high-school; maybe -they're in college — where they don't write and publish a lot of +prestigious universities—maybe they're in high-school; maybe +they're in college—where they don't write and publish a lot of things and there's not a tremendous demand for them. But a lot of them are smart. A lot of them know their subjects well and they could write textbooks about lots of subjects and share them with the world @@ -1200,7 +1207,7 @@ and receive a tremendous amount of appreciation from the people who will have learned from them.</p> <p> <b>QUESTION</b>: That's what I proposed. But the funny thing is, I do -know the history of education. That's what I do — educational, +know the history of education. That's what I do—educational, electronic media projects. I couldn't find an example. Do you know of one?</p> <p> @@ -1249,16 +1256,16 @@ in terms of the size of the whole job. Think in terms of the piece that you're going to do. That will show people it can be done, and so others will do other pieces.</p> - -<hr /> -<blockquote id="fsfs"><p>This speech is published -in <a href="http://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/"><cite>Free +<hr class="no-display" /> +<div class="edu-note c"><p id="fsfs">This speech is published in +<a href="https://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/"><cite>Free Software, Free Society: The Selected Essays of Richard -M. Stallman</cite></a>.</p></blockquote> +M. Stallman</cite></a>.</p></div> +</div> </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above --> <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" --> -<div id="footer"> +<div id="footer" role="contentinfo"> <div class="unprintable"> <p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to @@ -1276,13 +1283,13 @@ to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>.</p> to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org"> <web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p> - <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of + <p>For information on coordinating and contributing translations of our web pages, see <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations README</a>. --> Please see the <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations -README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations +README</a> for information on coordinating and contributing translations of this article.</p> </div> @@ -1303,7 +1310,7 @@ of this article.</p> There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. --> -<p>Copyright © 2001, 2007, 2008, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p> +<p>Copyright © 2001, 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p> <p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative @@ -1313,7 +1320,7 @@ Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p> <p class="unprintable">Updated: <!-- timestamp start --> -$Date: 2020/12/08 11:48:20 $ +$Date: 2021/10/14 13:02:23 $ <!-- timestamp end --> </p> </div> |