diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/wipo-PublicAwarenessOfCopyright-2002.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/wipo-PublicAwarenessOfCopyright-2002.html | 153 |
1 files changed, 153 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/wipo-PublicAwarenessOfCopyright-2002.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/wipo-PublicAwarenessOfCopyright-2002.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..9a6b778 --- /dev/null +++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/wipo-PublicAwarenessOfCopyright-2002.html @@ -0,0 +1,153 @@ +<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" --> +<!-- Parent-Version: 1.77 --> +<title>Public Awareness of Copyright, WIPO +- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title> + +<meta http-equiv="Keywords" content="GNU, FSF, Free Software Foundation, WIPO, Intellectual Property" /> + +<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/wipo-PublicAwarenessOfCopyright-2002.translist" --> +<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" --> +<h2>Public Awareness of Copyright, WIPO, June 2002</h2> + +<p>by <a href="http://www.stallman.org">Richard Stallman</a></p> + +<p>Geofrey Yu, Assistant Director General in charge of Copyright at +WIPO, said this in a paper “Public Awareness of +Copyright”, in June 2002. It is interesting that WIPO is +starting to find that the hypocrisy of describing a system of +restricting the public as a matter of “rights” is starting +to backfire on them.</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>First the message. For it to go over well, I recommend +downplaying the reference to ‘rights’. the term itself is +perfectly acceptable, but in daily usage, it has a negative +connotation of rights without corresponding obligations and has a +[sic] ‘us’ against ‘them’ implication. This +won't do, therefore, as we want to win the public and consumer to our +side. Unfortunately, we cannot turn the clock back and find a new +term in place of ‘copyright’ but we can at least down-play +the term ‘rights’. The WIPO Performance and the +Phonograms Treaty (WPPT) is about the protection of performers and +phonogram producers. The word ‘right’ is happily missing +in their titles. And we should take out cure from them.</p> + +<p>Within the copyright community such as we are today in this +room, it is fine to refer to artists, composers, performers and +enterprises as ‘rights holders’. But it is poor public +relations to employ the same terms when speaking to politicians, +consumers users and the public. With them, we must use the terms +devoid of legal jargon, terms, which are at least as neutral or better +still, inclusive,conveying meanings with which the public can +identify. So ‘rights holders’ should become painters, +writers, sculptors, musicians. +<span class="gnun-split"></span>What goes down well today with general +audiences are terms like ‘culture’, +‘creativity’, ‘information’ , +‘entertainment’, ‘cultural diversity’, +‘cultural heritage’, ‘reward for creativity’, +‘cultural enrichment’. And when we talk to youngsters, +terms like ‘fun’, ‘hip’, and +‘cool’ will find an echo. We must find the right slogans +too. At WIPO we coined a slogan for a Geneva cultural festival that +we sponsored which went “Soutenons les artistes et respectons +leurs creations.”</p> + +<p>In the same way, in our public outreach messages, it is better +to avoid terms like “copyright industries”. To call music +making and movie-making “copyright industries” is to cast +a business which is about people, imagination, fun, and creative +energy in a money-centred, legalistic light. It is like calling +car-making a patent industry. If we must use the term +“copyright” for brevity's sake, let us call the industries +“copyright-based industries”.</p> + +<p>To sum up, what I would suggest is we down-play business and +economics when speaking to the public and stress more the human, +creative, inspirational angle.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>What can we see here? First, look how openly WIPO admits (among +friends) that it takes the side of the copyright holders. There isn't +even a fig leaf for the interests of anyone else, or even for the idea +that copyright must be required to benefit the public (by promoting +progress at a reasonable social cost).</p> + +<p>Another is that the irony that the term “Intellectual +Property Rights” was adopted by the monopoly holders, precisely +so that they could present their privileges as rights that could not +be denied. The idea that they might have obligations as well as +rights, or that their power might be limited, is supposed to be +unthinkable. And who would ever believe that the music and movie +factories were “money-centred and legalistic”?</p> + +<p>If the hypocrisy of “intellectual property rights” is +starting to backfire on WIPO, this does not mean we should use that +term ourselves. If we did, we would be spreading WIPO-style +hypocrisy, whether we intended to or not.</p> + +</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 3.0 US. 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 © 2001, 2003, 2004, 2008, 2014 Free Software +Foundation, Inc.</p> + +<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" +href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/">Creative +Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>.</p> + +<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" --> + +<p class="unprintable">Updated: +<!-- timestamp start --> +$Date: 2014/04/12 12:40:49 $ +<!-- timestamp end --> +</p> +</div> +</div> +</body> +</html> |