[p2p-research] My letter to Obama

[M. Fioretti]

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 20:32:51 PM +0700, Michel Bauwens wrote:
> Marco,
> 
> what you propose would involve the repeal of the legislation that
> Kevin mentions

No, why? I'm not saying to repeal DMCA, WIPO, TRIPS, etc.. Not the
copyright part, at least (*)
 
I am saying that that is all stuff which only applies to copyrighted
"content", not to stuff which is in the public domain. If you leave
those treaties as they are, but only change that one line, to say that
everything goes to public domain five or max ten years after
publication, instead of 70+, you immediately make the Disneys and
Sonys of the world financially not convenient.

They'd go bankrupt on the stock exchange one year after copyright
duration were reduced. Such corporations make sense today (and have
enough money to bully artists and people) because they can still cash
in on stuff produced decades ago. Pull that rug off their feet, and
investors themselves will immediately sell those stocks for something
more profitable.

The first Harry Potter book was published in 1997: the profit
expectations of the editor and the control fetish of Mrs Rowling (that
is all the backing for the ridiculous limitations of fair use, derived
work and so on on those characters and plots) are only relevant
because copyright still applies, not because WIPO, DMCA and TRIPS
exist.

Had copyright been 10 years, Bloomsbury stock holders and Rowling
would be rich all the same, but already powerless today, as far as
damaging culture is concerned. Rowling could yell from all rooftops
that she's the only one who can write Potter, and nobody would care.

Had copyright been 5 or 10 years, probably Bloomsbury and Rowling
would have also been much less of a bully in the past years. You don't
piss off people if you know that the gun you're holding to their head
will vanish very soon.

Ditto for all entertainment corporations, and 90% of contemporary
popular culture, from Dylan to Star Wars. If you have a big gun (DMCA,
etc...) which expires very soon, equally soon you end up with no money
to use it or cover the abuses you did with that gun; and so little
time to use it anyway that the ROI of being an a**hole is greatly
reduced. And there goes the money to lobby for DRM in parliaments.
All the other bad consequences of DMCA and friends would remain
without money to actually apply them.

>, so I don't think you're saying anything different. I don't think
> Kevin proposes a radical abolition, just a scaling back,

same here. I'm just pointing out that there may be a much more
efficient way to get there.

"Cut copyright to 5 or ten years tomorrow" is something Joe Sixpack
can understand and vote for. "Abolish WIPO, DMCA etc.." is much harder
to sell to the general public.

If you have a raging bull in a corral, harassing all the cows and the
cowboys, you can make a huge, dangerous effort to physically remove it
from the corral. Or you can just shoot it with a syringe full of
extra-strenght anesthetic, which will keep it alive but so weak that
it won't hurt anybody.

Marco

(*) yes, I've deliberately ignored here all the other parts of the
"intellectual property" universe which are also managed by those
treaties. One thing at a time, or at least per discussion.

-- 
Your own civil rights and the quality of your life heavily depend on how
software is used *around* you:            http://digifreedom.net/node/84