diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/digital-inclusion-in-freedom.html')
-rw-r--r-- | talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/digital-inclusion-in-freedom.html | 1072 |
1 files changed, 1072 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/digital-inclusion-in-freedom.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/digital-inclusion-in-freedom.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c7078d0 --- /dev/null +++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/digital-inclusion-in-freedom.html @@ -0,0 +1,1072 @@ +<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" --> +<!-- Parent-Version: 1.90 --> +<title>Is Digital Inclusion a Good Thing? How Can We Make Sure It Is? +- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title> +<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/digital-inclusion-in-freedom.translist" --> +<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" --> +<h2>Is Digital Inclusion a Good Thing? How Can We Make Sure It Is?</h2> + +<address class="byline">by +<a href="http://www.stallman.org/">Richard Stallman</a></address> + +<p><em>This essay was first published in the proceedings of the ITU's 2009 +Kaleidoscope conference in Mar del Plata, Argentina.</em></p> +<hr class="thin" /> + +<h3 id="intro">INTRODUCTION</h3> + +<p>Digital information and communication technology offers the +possibility of a new world of freedom. It also offers possibilities +of surveillance and control which dictatorships of the past could only +struggle to establish. The battle to decide between these +possibilities is being fought now.</p> + +<p>Activities directed at “including” more people in the +use of digital technology are predicated on the assumption that such +inclusion is invariably a good thing. It appears so, when judged +solely by immediate practical convenience. However, if we judge also +in terms of human rights, the question of whether digital inclusion is +good or bad depends on what kind of digital world we are to be +included in. If we wish to work towards digital inclusion as a goal, +it behooves us to make sure it is the good kind.</p> + +<p>The digital world today faces six major threats to users' freedom: +surveillance, censorship, proprietary software, restricted formats, +software as a service, and copyright enforcement. A program to +promote “digital inclusion” must take account of these +threats, so as to avoid exposing its intended beneficiaries to them. +First we look at the nature of these threats; then we propose measures +to resist them, collectively and individually.</p> + +<h3 id="surveillance">SURVEILLANCE</h3> + +<p>Digital surveillance systems are spreading. The UK uses computers +with cameras to track all car travel. China plans to identify and +photograph everyone that uses an Internet cafe.<a name="tex2html1" +href="#foot100"><sup>1</sup></a></p> + +<p>Cell phones are Big Brother's tools. Some can be activated by +remote command to listen to the user's conversations without giving +any sign of listening, by the police<a name="tex2html3" +href="#foot101"><sup>2</sup></a> and by unauthorized +individuals.<a name="tex2html5" href="#foot102"><sup>3</sup></a> Users +are unable to stop this because the software in the phone is not +free/libre, thus not under the users' control.</p> + +<p>Cell phones also localize the user, even when set to +“idle.” The phone network needs to know roughly where the +phone is located in order to communicate with it, and can easily +record that information permanently. However, networks are designed +to locate phones far more accurately by triangulation. They can do it +even better with GPS in the phone, with or without the user's +consent.</p> + +<p>In many countries, universal digital surveillance does not record +what you say, only who you talk with. But that is enough to be quite +dangerous, since it allows the police to follow social networks. If a +known dissident talks with you by phone or email, you are a candidate +for labeling as a dissident. It is no use ceasing to communicate by +phone or email with fellow dissidents when a dictator takes power, +because his secret police will have access to records of your past +communications.</p> + +<p>The European Union mandates keeping records of all phone calls and +email for periods up to two years. The stated purpose of this +surveillance is to “prevent terrorism.” Bush's illegal +surveillance of phone calls also cited this purpose. +Non-state-sponsored terrorism is a real danger in a few countries, but +the magnitude is often exaggerated; more people died in the US in +September 2001 from car accidents than from terrorism, but we have no +Global War on Accidents. By contrast, the practice of labeling +political opposition as “terrorists,” and using supposed +“anti-terror” laws to infiltrate and sabotage their +activities, threatens democracy everywhere. For instance, the US +Joint Terrorism Task Force infiltrated a wide range of political +opposition groups.<a name="tex2html7" +href="#foot103"><sup>4</sup></a></p> + +<p>False accusations of “terrorism” are standard practice +for suppressing political opposition. In the US, protesters who +smashed windows at the 2008 Republican National Convention were +charged with “terrorism.”<a name="tex2html9" +href="#foot104"><sup>5</sup></a> More recently, Iran described +protesters demanding a new election as +“terrorists.”<a name="tex2html11" +href="#foot105"><sup>6</sup></a> The generals who ruled most of South +America in the 1970s offered precisely that justification for their +systematic murder of dissidents.<a name="tex2html13" +href="#foot20"><sup>7</sup></a></p> + +<p>A free society does not guarantee anonymity in what you do outside +your home: it is always possible that someone will notice where you +went on the street, or that a merchant will remember what you bought. +This information is dispersed, not assembled for ready use. A +detective can track down the people who noticed you and ask them for +it; each person may or may not say what he knows about you. The +effort required for this limits how often it is done.</p> + +<p>By contrast, systematic digital surveillance collects all the +information about everyone for convenient use for whatever purpose, +whether it be marketing, infiltration, or arrest of dissidents. +Because this endangers the people's control over the state, we must +fight against surveillance whether or not we oppose current government +policies. Given the surveillance and tracking which cell phones do, I +have concluded it is my duty to refuse to have one, despite the +convenience it would offer. I have few secrets about my own travels, +most of which are for publicly announced speeches, but we need to +fight surveillance even if it is established while we have no +particular secrets to keep.</p> + +<p>The UK car travel surveillance system has already been used against +political dissidents.<a name="tex2html14" +href="#foot106"><sup>8</sup></a></p> + +<h3 id="censorship">CENSORSHIP</h3> + +<p>When the topic of Internet censorship is mentioned, people are +likely to think of China, but many supposedly freedom-respecting +countries have imposed censorship. Denmark's government has blocked +access to a secret list of web pages. Australia's government wants to +do likewise, but has met strong resistance, so instead it has +forbidden links to a long list of URLs. Electronic Frontiers +Australia was forced, under threat of fines of AUD 11,000 per day, to +remove a link to an anti-abortion political web +site.<a name="tex2html16" href="#foot107"><sup>9</sup></a> Denmark's +secret list of forbidden URLs was leaked and posted on Wikileaks; that +page is now on Australia's banned list.<a name="tex2html18" +href="#foot108"><sup>10</sup></a> Germany is on the verge of launching +Internet censorship.<a name="tex2html20" +href="#foot109"><sup>11</sup></a></p> + +<p>Censorship of the contents of web sites is also a threat. India +just announced a broad plan of censorship that would effectively +abolish freedom of the press on the Internet.<a name="tex2html22" +href="#foot110"><sup>12</sup></a></p> + +<p>Some European countries censor particular political views on the +Internet. In the United States, people have been imprisoned as +“terrorists” for running a web site which discussed +actions taken against experiments on animals.<a name="tex2html24" +href="#foot28"><sup>13</sup></a></p> + +<p>Another common excuse for censorship is the claim that +“obscene” works are dangerous. I agree that some works +are obscene; for instance, the gruesome violence in the movie Pulp +Fiction revolted me, and I will try never to see such a thing again. +But that does not justify censoring it; no matter how obscene a work +may be, censorship is more so. A variant of this excuse is +“protecting children,” which plays to the exaggerated and +mostly misplaced fears of parents.<a name="tex2html25" +href="#foot111"><sup>14</sup></a></p> + +<p>Censorship is nothing new. What is new is the ease and +effectiveness of censorship on electronic communication and +publication (even where a few wizards have ways to bypass it). China +in 1960 achieved effective censorship by cutting its population off +from the world, but that held back the country's development, which +was painful for the regime as well as for the population. Today China +uses digital technology to achieve effective political censorship +without cutting itself off in other ways.<a name="tex2html27" +href="#foot112"><sup>15</sup></a></p> + +<h3 id="control">SOFTWARE YOU CAN'T CONTROL</h3> + +<p>In order for computer users to have freedom in their own computing +activities, they must have control over the software they use. This +means it must be <em>free software</em>, which I here call +“free/libre” so as to emphasize that this is a matter of +freedom, not price.</p> + +<p>A program is free/libre if it gives the user these four essential +freedoms:<a name="tex2html29" href="#foot113"><sup>16</sup></a></p> + +<ul> +<li>0. Freedom to run the program as you wish.</li> + +<li>1. Freedom to study the source code, and change it to make the +program do what you wish.</li> + +<li>2. Freedom to redistribute and/or republish exact copies. (This +is the freedom to help your neighbor.)</li> + +<li>3. Freedom to distribute and/or publish copies of your modified +versions. (This is the freedom to contribute to your community.)</li> +</ul> + +<p>When software is free/libre, the users control what it does. A +non-free or <em>proprietary</em> program is under the control of its +developer, and functions as an instrument to give the developer +control over the users. It may be convenient, or it may not, but +in either case it imposes on its users a social system that keeps them +divided and helpless. Avoiding this injustice and giving users +control over their computing requires the four freedoms. Freedoms 0 +and 1 give you control over your own computing, and freedom 3 enables +users to work together to jointly control their computing, while +freedom 2 means users are not kept divided.<a name="tex2html31" +href="#foot114"><sup>17</sup></a></p> + +<p>Many argue that free/libre software is impossible on theoretical +economic grounds. Some of them misinterpret free/libre software as +“gratis software”; others understand the term correctly, +but either way they claim that businesses will never want to develop +such software. Combining this with a theoretical premise such as +“Useful software can only be developed by paying +programmers,” they conclude that free software could never +exist. This argument is typically presented elliptically in the form +of a question such as, “How can programmers make a living if +software is free?” Both premises, as well as the conclusion, +contradict well-known facts; perhaps the elliptical questions are +meant to obscure the premises so people will not compare them with the +facts.</p> + +<p>We know that free software can be developed because so much of it +exists. There are thousands of useful free +programs,<a name="tex2html34" href="#foot115"><sup>18</sup></a> and +millions of users<a name="tex2html36" +href="#foot116"><sup>19</sup></a> run the +GNU/Linux<a name="tex2html38" +href="#foot117"><sup>20</sup></a>operating system. Thousands of +programmers write useful free software as +volunteers.<a name="tex2html40" href="#foot118"><sup>21</sup></a> +Companies such as Red Hat, IBM, Oracle, and Google pay programmers to +write free software. I do not know even approximately how many paid +free software developers there are; studying the question would be +useful. Alexandre Zapolsky of the free software business event Paris +Capitale du Libre (<a +href="http://web.archive.org/web/20140402120239/http://paris-libre.org/">http://www.paris-libre.org</a>) said +in 2007 that the free software companies of France had over 10,000 +employees.</p> + +<p>Most computer users use proprietary software, and are accustomed to +letting a few companies control their computing. If you are one of +them, you may have accepted the view that it is normal and proper for +those companies, rather than you, to have control. You may also +believe that “reputable” developers will not use their +power to mistreat you. The fact is that they do.</p> + +<p>Microsoft Windows has features to spy on the +user,<a name="tex2html43" href="#foot119"><sup>22</sup></a> Digital +Restrictions Management (DRM) features designed to stop the user from +making full use of his own files,<a name="tex2html45" +href="#foot120"><sup>23</sup></a> and an all-purpose back door with +which Microsoft can forcibly change the software in any way at any +time.<a name="tex2html47" href="#foot121"><sup>24</sup></a> Microsoft +can alter any software, not just its own.<a name="tex2html49" +href="#foot122"><sup>25</sup></a> Cell phones tied to particular phone +networks may give the network a similar back door. MacOS also has DRM +features designed to restrict the user.</p> + +<p>The only known defense against malicious features is to insist on +software that is controlled by the users: free/libre software. It is +not a perfect guarantee, but the alternative is no defense at all. If +code is law, those governed by it must have the power to decide what +it should say.</p> + +<h3 id="protocols">RESTRICTED FORMATS</h3> + +<p>Restricted file formats impose private control over communication +and publication. Those who control the formats control, in a general +sense, society's use of information, since it can't be distributed or +read/viewed without their permission.</p> + +<p>For instance, text files are often distributed in the secret +Microsoft Word format, which other developers have only imperfectly +been able to decode and implement. This practice is comparable to +publishing books in a secret alphabet which only officially approved +scribes know how to read. Italian public television (RAI) distributes +video in VC-1 format, whose specifications are available only under +nondisclosure agreement from the Society of Motion Picture and +Television Engineers. (As of 2016 RAI seems to have shifted to +a non-secret format.) Ironically, the SMPTE states this in a Word file, +which is not suitable to cite as a reference.<a name="tex2html51" +href="#foot123"><sup>26</sup></a> This standard has been partly +decoded through reverse engineering.</p> + +<p>Most music distribution on the Internet uses the patented MP3 +format<a name="tex2html82" href="#foot137"><sup>42</sup></a>, and most +video uses patented MPEG-4 formats such as DIVX and H.264. VC-1 is +also patented.<a name="tex2html53" href="#foot124"><sup>27</sup></a> +Any software patent directly attacks every user's freedom to use her +computer. Use of patented data formats is comparable to mandating +that people use officially approved scribes rather than do their own +reading and writing. Patents on MPEG formats have been used to attack +and threaten developers and distributors of programs that can handle +these formats, including free/libre programs. Some distributors of +the GNU/Linux system, for instance Red Hat, do not dare to include +support for these programs.</p> + +<p>A restricted format is a trap; any and all use of the format has +the effect of pushing computer users into the trap. Inclusion in +dependence on these formats is not a step forward.</p> + +<h3 id="saas">SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE</h3> + +<p>Typical proprietary software gives you only a binary, whose actions +are controlled by the developer, and not by you. A new practice +called “software as a service,” or “SaaS,” +gives you even less control. With SaaS you don't even get a copy of +the program you can run. Instead, you send your data to a server, a +program runs there, and the server sends you back the result. If +users have a binary, they could reverse-engineer it and patch it if +they are really determined. With SaaS, they can't even do that.</p> + +<p>Reverse engineering being so difficult, perhaps software as a +service is little worse than proprietary software. The point, +however, is that it is no better. For users to have control of their +computing, they must avoid SaaS just as they must avoid proprietary +software.</p> + +<p>For the preparation of this paper I was invited to use an IEEE site +called <a href="http://pdf-express.org">pdf-express.org</a> to convert +my PDF file into one with the embedded fonts required for the +conference proceedings. Looking at that site, I concluded that it was +an instance of software as a service, and therefore I should not use +it. Another strike against it is that it requires users to identify +themselves, which is gratuitous surveillance.</p> + +<p>It's not that I'm specifically worried that this site is malicious. +I cannot trust the IEEE implicitly, since I disapprove of its +restrictions on redistributing the papers it publishes, but there is +little scope in that particular site's job for intentional +mistreatment of its users (aside from the gratuitous surveillance). +However, the point is not whether this particular site abuses its +power. The point is that we should not let ourselves become +accustomed to granting others that sort of power over us. The habit +of handing over control of our computing to others is a dangerous one. +The way to resist the practice is to refuse invitations to follow +it.</p> + +<p>The only way to maintain your control over your computing is to do +it using your own copy of a free/libre program.</p> + +<h3 id="copyright">COPYRIGHT AND SHARING</h3> + +<p>The biggest conflict over freedom in the Internet is the War on +Sharing: the attempt by the publishing industry to prevent Internet +users from enjoying the capability to copy and share information.</p> + +<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 used 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, so it was easy to enforce and met with +little opposition. That made copyright arguably a beneficial system +for the public, and therefore legitimate.</p> + +<p>Well and good—back then.</p> + +<h4 id="waronsharing">The War on Sharing</h4> + +<p>Nowadays, computers and networks provide superior means for +distributing and manipulating information, including published +software, musical recordings, texts, images, and videos. Networks +offer the possibility of unlimited access to all sorts of +data—an information utopia.</p> + +<p>The works that people use to do practical jobs, such as software, +recipes, text fonts, educational works and reference works, must be +free/libre so that the users can control (individually and +collectively) the jobs that they do with these works. That argument +does not apply to other kinds of works, such as those which state what +certain people thought, and artistic works, so it is not ethically +obligatory for them to be free/libre. But there is a minimum freedom +that the public must have for all published works: the freedom to +share exact copies noncommercially. Sharing is good; sharing creates +the bonds of society. When copying and sharing a book was so +difficult that one would hardly ask such a large favor, the issue of +freedom to share was moot. Today, the Internet makes sharing easy, +and thus makes the freedom to share essential.</p> + +<p>One obstacle stands in the way of this utopia: copyright. Readers +and listeners who make use of their new ability to copy and share +published information are technically copyright infringers. The same +law which formerly acted as a beneficial industrial regulation on +publishers has now become a restriction on the public it was meant to +benefit.</p> + +<p>In a democracy, a law that prohibits a popular and useful activity +is usually soon relaxed. Not so where corporations have more political +power than the public. The entertainment companies' lobby is +determined to prevent the public from taking advantage of the power of +their computers, and has found copyright a suitable tool. Under their +influence, rather than relaxing copyright rules to permit productive +and free use of the Internet, governments have made it stricter than +ever, forbidding the act of sharing.</p> + +<p>The publishers and their friendly governments would like to go to +any length they can get away with to wage the War on Sharing. In the +US, the record companies' legal arm (the RIAA) regularly sues +teenagers for hundreds of thousands of dollars, and one sharer was +fined almost two million.<a name="tex2html56" +href="#foot125"><sup>28</sup></a> The French government recently +passed a law (HADOPI) to abolish the principle of due process of law, +by punishing Internet users with disconnection on the mere accusation +of copying. Only certain selected, government-approved organizations +were empowered to make such accusations; thus, this law meant to +abolish Liberté, Egalité, and Fraternité with one +blow. +<span class="gnun-split"></span>The law was rejected as unconstitutional by the Constitutional +Council.<a name="tex2html58" href="#foot126"><sup>29</sup></a> (It was +subsequently changed, introducing a sham trial, to make it acceptable.) A +similar law in New Zealand was withdrawn this year after public +protests. The European Parliament recently voted against imposing +similar injustice on the whole European Union, but the EU's weak form +of democracy does not give Parliament the final decision. Some would +like to go even further: a UK member of parliament proposed ten years' +imprisonment for noncommercial sharing.</p> + +<p>The US, Canada, the European Union, and various other countries are +engaged in negotiating the “Anti-Counterfeiting Trade +Agreement.” The negotiations are secret, but Canada reluctantly +published a list of suggestions it received from private parties, and +HADOPI-style punishment without trial was one of +them.<a name="tex2html60" href="#foot127"><sup>30</sup></a> The +suggestion is likely to have come from the copyright lobby, which has +great influence in the US government and others, so the danger is not +negligible. European officials may seek to use this treaty to +circumvent the European Parliament, following a practice known as +“policy laundering.”</p> + +<p>The corporations that profit most from copyright legally exercise +it in the name of the authors (most of whom actually gain little). +They would have us 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 “piracy,” equating helping your +neighbor with attacking a ship.</p> + +<p>Public anger over these measures is growing, but it is held back by +propaganda. Terms such as “piracy,”<a name="tex2html62" +href="#foot128"><sup>31</sup></a> “protecting authors” and +“intellectual property,”<a name="tex2html64" +href="#foot129"><sup>32</sup></a> and claims that reading, viewing or +listening to anything without paying is “theft,” have +convinced many readers that their rights and interests do not count. +This propaganda implicitly assumes that publishers deserve the special +power which they exercise in the name of the authors, and that we are +morally obliged to suffer whatever measures might be needed to +maintain their power.</p> + +<h4 id="digitalrestrictionsmanagement">Digital restrictions +management</h4> + +<p>The publishers aim to do more than punish sharing. They have +realized that by publishing works in encrypted formats, which can be +viewed only with software designed to control the users, they could +gain unprecedented power over all use of these works. They could +compel people to pay, and also to identify themselves, every time they +wish to read a book, listen to a song, or watch a video. They could +make people's copies disappear on a planned schedule. They could even +make copies unreadable at will, if they have all-purpose back-doors +such as found in Windows, or special features for the +purpose.<a name="tex2html66" href="#foot130"><sup>33</sup></a></p> + +<p>Designing products and media to restrict the user is called Digital +Restrictions Management, or DRM.<a name="tex2html68" +href="#foot66"><sup>34</sup></a> Its purpose is an injustice: to deny +computer users what would otherwise be their legal rights in using +their copies of published works. Its method is a second injustice, +since it imposes the use of proprietary software.</p> + +<p>The publishers gained US government support for their dream of +total power with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (DMCA). +This law gave publishers power, in effect, to write their own +copyright rules, by implementing them in the code of the authorized +player software. Even reading or listening is illegal when the +software is designed to block it.</p> + +<p>The DMCA has an exception: it does not forbid uses that qualify as +“fair use.” But it strips this exception of practical +effect by censoring any software that people could use to do these +things. Under the DMCA, any program that could be used to break +digital handcuffs is banned unless it has other comparably important +“commercially significant” uses. (The denial of validity +to any other kind of significance, such as social or ethical +significance, explicitly endorses business' domination of society.) +Practically speaking, the limited right to disobey your software +jailer is meaningless since the means to do so is not available.</p> + +<p>Similar software censorship laws have since been adopted in the +European Union, Australia, and New Zealand, and other countries. +Canada has tried to do this for several years, but opposition there +has blocked it. The publishers' lobbies seek to impose these +restrictions on all countries; for instance, the US demands them in +trade treaties. WIPO (the World “Intellectual Property” +Organization) helps, by promoting two treaties whose sole point is to +require laws such as these. Signing these treaties does no good for a +country's citizens, and there is no good reason why any country should +sign them. But when countries do sign, politicians can cite +“compliance with treaty obligations” as an excuse for +software censorship.</p> + +<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 +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, thus +enabling computerized surveillance—and public libraries become +retail outlets. That is the world the publishers want for us. If you +buy the Amazon Kindle (we call it the <a +href="/philosophy/why-call-it-the-swindle.html">Swindle</a>) +or the Sony Reader (we +call it the Shreader for what it threatens to do to books), you pay to +establish that world.</p> + +<h3 id="supportingartists">SUPPORTING THE ARTS</h3> + +<p>The publishers tell us that a War on Sharing is the only way to +keep art alive. Supporting the arts is a desirable goal, but it could +not justify these means. Fortunately, it does not require them +either. Public sharing of copies tends to call attention to obscure +or niche works: when Monty Python put its video files on the net for +download, its sales increased by a factor of over +200.<a name="tex2html69" href="#foot131"><sup>35</sup></a> Meanwhile, +digital technology also offers new ways to support the arts.</p> + +<h4 id="donations">Donations</h4> + +<p>The singer Jane Siberry offers her music for +download through her own web site, called <a name="tex2html71" +href="http://janesiberry.com">janesiberry.com</a> in 2010, allowing people to pay +whatever amount they wish. The average price paid per song was earlier +reported to be more than the $.99 that the major +record companies charge.<a name="tex2html72" +href="#foot132"><sup>36</sup></a></p> + +<p>Bestsellers also can still do well without stopping people from +sharing. Stephen King got hundreds of thousands of dollars selling a +serialized unencrypted e-book with no technical obstacle to sharing of +copies. Radiohead made millions in 2007 by inviting fans to copy an +album and pay what they wished, while it was also shared on the +Internet. In 2008, Nine Inch Nails released an album with permission +to share copies and made 750,000 dollars in a few +days.<a name="tex2html74" href="#foot133"><sup>37</sup></a></p> + +<p>Even hampered by today's inconvenient methods of sending money to +artists, voluntary contributions from fans can support them. Kevin +Kelly, former editor of Wired Magazine, estimates the artist need only +find approximately 1,000 true fans in order to earn a living from +their support.<a name="tex2html76" +href="#foot134"><sup>38</sup></a></p> + +<p>But when computer networks provide an easy anonymous method for +sending someone a small amount of money, without requiring a credit +card, voluntary support for artists will become far more effective. +Every player could have a button you can press, “Click here to +send the artists one dollar.” (The optimal amount may vary +between countries; in India, one rupee might be a better choice.) +Wouldn't you press it, at least once a week?</p> + +<p>Why, today, would you hesitate to send one dollar to an artist, +once a week or even once a day? Not because you would miss the +dollar, but because of the inconvenience of sending it. Remove the +inconvenience, and voluntary support for artists will soar.</p> + +<h4 id="tax">Tax-based support</h4> + +<p>Another way to support the arts is with tax funds: perhaps with a +special tax on blank media or Internet connectivity, or with general +revenue.<a name="tex2html78" href="#foot135"><sup>39</sup></a> If this +is to succeed in supporting artists, the state should distribute the +tax money directly and entirely to them, and make sure it cannot under +any pretext be taken from them by publishers such as record companies. +Thus, in order to design this tax system to achieve the valid goal of +“supporting the arts,” we must first reject the misguided +goal of “compensating the rights-holders.”</p> + +<p>The state should not distribute this tax money in linear proportion +to popularity, because that would give most of it to superstars, +leaving little to support all the other artists. I therefore +recommend using a function whose derivative is positive but tends +towards zero, such as cube root. With cube root, if superstar A has +1000 times the popularity of successful artist B, A will get 10 times +as much money as B. (A linear system would give A 1000 times as much +as B.) This way, although each superstar still gets a larger share +than other artists, the superstars together will get only a small +fraction of the funds, so that the system can adequately support a +large number of fairly popular artists. This system would use its +funds efficiently for the support of art.</p> + +<p>I propose this system for art because art is where the controversy +is. There is no fundamental reason why a tax-based system should not +also be used to support functional works that ought to be free/libre, +such as software and encyclopedias, but there is a practical +difficulty in doing so: it is common for those works to have thousands +of coauthors, and figuring out the right way to divide the funds among +them might be difficult even with the cooperation and generosity of +everyone involved. Fortunately it appears not to be necessary to +solve this problem, because people already put so much effort into +developing free/libre functional works.</p> + +<p>Francis Muguet<a name="tex2html80" href="#foot79"><sup>40</sup></a> +and I have developed a new proposal called the Mécénat +Global (or Global Patronage) which combines the idea of tax-support +and voluntary payments.<a name="tex2html81" +href="#foot136"><sup>41</sup></a> Every Internet subscriber would pay +a monthly fee to support certain arts that are shared on the Internet. +Each user could optionally divide up to a certain maximum portion of +her fee among her choice of works; the funds for each work would be +divided among the creative contributors to the work (but not the +publishers). The totals thus assigned to various artists would also +provide a measure of each artist's popularity. The system would then +distribute the rest of the money on the basis of that popularity, +using a cube-root or similar tapering-off function.</p> + +<h3 id="makingitgood">MAKING DIGITAL INCLUSION GOOD</h3> + +<p>The paper so far describes the factors that can make digital +inclusion good or bad. These factors are part of human society and +subject to our influence. Beyond just asking whether and when digital +inclusion is a good thing, we can consider how to make sure it is +good.</p> + +<h4 id="legally">Defending freedom legally</h4> + +<p>Full victory over the threats to digital freedom can only be +achieved through changes in laws. Systematic collection or retention +of information on any person using computers and/or networks should +require a specific court order; travel and communication within any +country should normally be anonymous. States should reject censorship +and adopt constitutional protections against it. States should +protect their computing sovereignty by using only free software, and +schools should teach only free software in order to carry out their +mission to educate good citizens of a strong, free and cooperating +society.</p> + +<p>To respect computer users' freedom to operate their computers, +states should not allow patents to apply to software or (more +generally) using computers in particular ways. States should mandate +their own use of freely implementable, publicly documented formats for +all communication with the public, and should lead the private sector +also to use only these formats. To make copyright acceptable in the +network age, noncommercial copying and sharing of published works +should be legal. Commercial use of DRM should be prohibited, and +independently developed free software to access DRM formats should be +lawful.</p> + +<p>To make these changes in laws happen, we need to organize. The +Electronic Frontier Foundation (<a href="http://eff.org">eff.org</a>) +campaigns against censorship and surveillance. End Software Patents +(<a href="http://endsoftpatents.org">endsoftpatents.org</a>) campaigns against +software patents. The Free Software Foundation campaigns against DRM +through the site +<a href="http://DefectiveByDesign.org">DefectiveByDesign.org</a>.</p> + +<h4 id="personally">Defending freedom personally</h4> + +<p>While we fight these legislative battles, we should also personally +reject products and services designed to take away our freedom. To +resist surveillance, we should avoid identifying ourselves to web +sites unless it is inherently necessary, and we should buy things +anonymously—with cash, not with bank cards. To maintain control +of our computing, we should not use proprietary software or software +as a service.</p> + +<p>Above all, we should never buy or use products that implement DRM +handcuffs unless we personally have the means to break them. Products +with DRM are a trap; don't take the bait!</p> + +<h4 id="others">Defending others' freedom</h4> + +<p>We can take direct action to protect others' freedom in the digital +world. For instance, we can remove the passwords from our wireless +networks—it is safe, and it weakens government surveillance +power. (The way to protect the privacy of our own Internet +communications, to the extent that it is possible, is with end-to-end +encryption.) If others use enough of the bandwidth to cause actual +inconvenience, we need to protect ourselves, but we can try gentle +methods first (such as talking with the neighbors, or setting a +password occasionally for a day or two), and keep the option of a +permanent password as a last resort.</p> + +<p>When we publish, we should grant the users of our work the freedoms +they deserve, by applying an explicit license appropriate to the type +of work. For works that state your thoughts or observations, and +artistic works, the license should permit at least noncommercial +redistribution of exact copies; any Creative Commons license is +suitable. (I insisted on such a license for this article.) Works +that do functional jobs, such as software, reference works and +educational works, should carry a free/libre license that grants users +the four freedoms.</p> + +<h4 id="inclusioninfreedom">Inclusion in freedom</h4> + +<p>In our efforts to help others in practical ways, we must avoid +doing them harm at a deeper level. Until freedom is generally assured +in Internet use, projects for digital inclusion must take special care +that the computing they promote is the freedom-respecting kind. This +means using free/libre software—certainly not Windows or MacOS. +This means using free, documented formats, without DRM. It also means +not exposing the supposed beneficiaries to surveillance or censorship +through the computing practices to which they are being +introduced.</p> + +<h3 id="footnotes">Footnotes</h3> + +<dl> +<dt id="foot100">… cafe.<a + href="#tex2html1"><sup>1</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://www.cecc.gov/publications/commission-analysis/beijing-requires-photo-registration-at-all-internet-cafes-by">http://www.cecc.gov/publications/commission-analysis/beijing-requires-photo-registration-at-all-internet-cafes-by</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot101">… police<a + href="#tex2html3"><sup>2</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/12/remotely_eavesd_1.html">http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/12/remotely_eavesd_1.html</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot102">… individuals.<a + href="#tex2html5"><sup>3</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a +href="http://www.newarkspeaks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5379"> +http://www.newarkspeaks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5379</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot103">… groups<a + href="#tex2html7"><sup>4</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="https://www.aclu.org/fbi-jttf-spying">http://www.aclu.org/fbi-jttf-spying</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot104">… “terrorism.”<a + href="#tex2html9"><sup>5</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://democracynow.org/2008/9/4/eight_members_of_rnc_activist_group">http://democracynow.org/2008/9/4/eight_members_of_rnc_activist_group</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot105">… “terrorists.”<a + href="#tex2html11"><sup>6</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://web-old.archive.org/web/20160722044945/http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=7891929"> +http://abcnews.go.com/international/story?id=7891929</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot20">… dissidents.<a + href="#tex2html13"><sup>7</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See the documentary, Condor: the First War on + Terror, by Rodrigo Vásquez (2003). + +</dd> +<dt id="foot106">… dissidents.<a + href="#tex2html14"><sup>8</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/whos_watching_you/8064333.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/whos_watching_you/8064333.stm</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot107">… site.<a + href="#tex2html16"><sup>9</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/302161/watchdog_threatens_online_rights_group_11k_fine?fp=16&fpid=1">http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/302161/watchdog_threatens_online_rights_group_11k_fine?fp=16&fpid=1</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot108">… list.<a + href="#tex2html18"><sup>10</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="https://www.smh.com.au/technology/banned-hyperlinks-could-cost-you-11-000-a-day-20090317-gdtf8j.html">https://www.smh.com.au/technology/banned-hyperlinks-could-cost-you-11-000-a-day-20090317-gdtf8j.html</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot109">… censorship.<a + href="#tex2html20"><sup>11</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See <a + href="http://netzpolitik.org/2009/the-dawning-of-internet-censorship-in-germany/">http://netzpolitik.org/2009/the-dawning-of-internet-censorship-in-germany/</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot110">… Internet.<a + href="#tex2html22"><sup>12</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See <a + href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Govt-gearing-up-to-gag-news-websites/articleshow/4562292.cms">http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Govt-gearing-up-to-gag-news-websites/articleshow/4562292.cms</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot28">… animals.<a + href="#tex2html24"><sup>13</sup></a></dt> +<dd>I support medical research + using animals, as well as abortion rights. Our defense of political + freedom should not be limited to causes we agree with. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot111">… parents.<a + href="#tex2html25"><sup>14</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article24476581.html"> + http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article24476581.html</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot112">… ways.<a + href="#tex2html27"><sup>15</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="https://www.networkworld.com/article/2255678/20-years-after-tiananmen--china-containing-dissent-online.html"> + http://www.networkworld.com/article/2255678/lan-wan/20-years-after-tiananmen--china-containing-dissent-online.html</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot113">… freedoms:<a + href="#tex2html29"><sup>16</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See <a + href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">http://gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot114">… divided.<a + href="#tex2html31"><sup>17</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="/philosophy/why-free.html">http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-free.html</a> and + <a + href="/philosophy/shouldbefree.html">http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.html</a> for other + arguments. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot115">… programs,<a + href="#tex2html34"><sup>18</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://directory.fsf.org">http://directory.fsf.org</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot116">… users<a + href="#tex2html36"><sup>19</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_adoption">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_adoption</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot117">… GNU/Linux<a + href="#tex2html38"><sup>20</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See <a + href="/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html">http://gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot118">… volunteers.<a + href="#tex2html40"><sup>21</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="/philosophy/fs-motives.html">http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/fs-motives.html</a> + for some of their motives. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot119">… user,<a + href="#tex2html43"><sup>22</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See <a +href="https://web.archive.org/web/20160313214751/http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/08/21/spotify_worse_than_the_nsa/"> +https://web.archive.org/web/20160313214751/http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/08/21/spotify_worse_than_the_nsa</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot120">… files,<a + href="#tex2html45"><sup>23</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://badvista.org">http://badvista.org</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot121">… time.<a + href="#tex2html47"><sup>24</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://www.informationweek.com/microsoft-updates-windows-without-user-permission-apologizes/d/d-id/1059183">http://www.informationweek.com/microsoft-updates-windows-without-user-permission-apologizes/d/d-id/1059183</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot122">… own.<a + href="#tex2html49"><sup>25</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2009/05/microsoft_update_quietly_insta.html">http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2009/05/microsoft_update_quietly_insta.html</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot123">… reference.<a + href="#tex2html51"><sup>26</sup></a></dt> +<dd>The standard in machine-readable form + is only available to be “leased”; + <a + href="http://www.smpte.org/sites/default/files/IndividualLicenseAgreementforSMPTE_EngineeringDocuments.pdf"> +http://www.smpte.org/sites/default/files/IndividualLicenseAgreementforSMPTE_EngineeringDocuments.pdf</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot124">… patented.<a + href="#tex2html53"><sup>27</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a +href="http://web.archive.org/web/20120307122114/http://www.mpegla.com/Lists/MPEG%20LA%20News%20List/Attachments/176/n_06-08-17_pr.pdf"> +http://www.mpegla.com/Lists/MPEG%20LA%20News%20List/Attachments/176/n_06-08-17_pr.pdf</a> (archived). + +</dd> +<dt id="foot125">… million.<a + href="#tex2html56"><sup>28</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/jammie-thomas-retrial-verdict.ars">http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/jammie-thomas-retrial-verdict.ars</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot126">… Council.<a + href="#tex2html58"><sup>29</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://www.laquadrature.net/fr/hadopi-is-dead-three-strikes-killed-by-highest-court">http://www.laquadrature.net/fr/hadopi-is-dead-three-strikes-killed-by-highest-court</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot127">… them.<a + href="#tex2html60"><sup>30</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/11/canadian-wish-list-for-secret-acta-treaty-long-varied.ars">http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/11/canadian-wish-list-for-secret-acta-treaty-long-varied.ars</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot128">… “piracy,”<a + href="#tex2html62"><sup>31</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html">gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot129">… property,”<a + href="#tex2html64"><sup>32</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="/philosophy/not-ipr.html">http://gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html</a> for why this propaganda + term is harmful. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot130">… purpose.<a + href="#tex2html66"><sup>33</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See <a + href="http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html">http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot66">… DRM.<a + href="#tex2html68"><sup>34</sup></a></dt> +<dd>Those publishers, in an act of doublespeak, call it “Digital + Rights Management”. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot131">… 200.<a + href="#tex2html69"><sup>35</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://www.boingboing.net/2009/01/23/monty-pythons-free-w.html">http://www.boingboing.net/2009/01/23/monty-pythons-free-w.html</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot132">… charge.<a + href="#tex2html72"><sup>36</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/419-jane-siberrys-you-decide-what-feels-right-pricing">http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/419-jane-siberrys-you-decide-what-feels-right-pricing</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot133">… days.<a + href="#tex2html74"><sup>37</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/05/nine-inch-nails-made.html">http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/05/nine-inch-nails-made.html</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot134">… support.<a + href="#tex2html76"><sup>38</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2008/03/1000_true_fans.php">http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2008/03/1000_true_fans.php</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot135">… revenue.<a + href="#tex2html78"><sup>39</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See <a + href="/philosophy/dat.html">http://gnu.org/philosophy/dat.html</a> + for my 1992 proposal. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot79">… Muguet<a + href="#tex2html80"><sup>40</sup></a></dt> +<dd>Head of the Knowledge Networks and Information + Society lab at the University of Geneva. +</dd> +<dt id="foot136">… payments.<a + href="#tex2html81"><sup>41</sup></a></dt> +<dd>See + <a + href="http://stallman.org/mecenat/global-patronage.html">http://stallman.org/mecenat/global-patronage.html</a>. + +</dd> +<dt id="foot137">… MP3<a + href="#tex2html82"><sup>42</sup></a></dt> +<dd>As of 2017 the patents on playing MP3 files have +reportedly expired. +</dd> +</dl> + +</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above --> +<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" --> +<div id="footer"> +<div class="unprintable"> + +<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to +<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><gnu@gnu.org></a>. +There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> +the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent +to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>.</p> + +<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph, + replace it with the translation of these two: + + We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality + translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection. + Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard + to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org"> + <web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p> + + <p>For information on coordinating and submitting 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 +of this article.</p> +</div> + +<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to + files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should + be under CC BY-ND 4.0. Please do NOT change or remove this + without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first. + Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the + document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the + document was modified, or published. + + If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too. + Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying + years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable + year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including + being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system). + + There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers + Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. --> + +<p>Copyright © 2009, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 Richard M. Stallman</p> + +<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" +href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative +Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p> + +<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" --> + +<p class="unprintable">Updated: +<!-- timestamp start --> +$Date: 2020/10/06 08:25:53 $ +<!-- timestamp end --> +</p> +</div> +</div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include --> +</body> +</html> |