[p2p-research] Fwd: [fcforum] Fw: iPad DRM is a dangerous step backward. Sign the petition!

[M. Fioretti]

On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 21:48:09 PM +0000, Andy Robinson (ldxar1 at gmail.com) wrote:
> 'The claim to be non-ideological, to be a direct expression of experience, is
> the ideological gesture par excellence' (Slavoj Zizek).

I said I am being concrete. It doesnt' esclude ideological.
 
> You can choose to submerge yourself in this ideological
> performativity and refuse to question its basic assumptions and
> perspectival biases - but by doing so, you lose the ability to
> engage with difference.

Not at all. When it comes to copyright (that's the only part of "IP" I
meant to talk about when I stepped in this thread and yes, not making
this clear from the beginning is my fault) my position is 

- current copyright is terribly screwed up.

- this said, copyright as compensation for _authors_ or _performers_
  for their consumption of a very limited resource, ie their own time,
  if they want such a compensation of course, is good and even needed,
  in many practical cases, to maximize production of useful/meaningful
  creative works.

- as long as copyright lasts say ten years from publication and has
  quite a stricter scope than it has today

this is an approach that doesn't exclude difference. In a system like
this, the majority of works in any given field and moment would be in
the public domain (ie the opposite of what happens today), and
everybody could freely decide wether to keep full copyright, going CC
or just release directly in the public domain with much less
consequences for society as a whole than it happens today. Aren't you
sure you aren't the one who wants to eliminate difference and go
monological, coercive and so on?

> The challenge is to realise that other perspectives also come from
> experiences, immediacies, actual connections in the world...  that
> indigenous shamans, autonomous social movement activists,
> impoverished unsuccessful artists and people playing music in bars
> in their 'free' time all exist in the real world and that their
> experiences have just as much concreteness and legitimacy as your
> own.

The only challenge here is for you to step down the pulpit and
acknowledge that I didn't deny for one moment the concreteness and
legitimacy and freedom of everybody else to do what they want. I do
accept difference.

> You do mean an abstract self, because I very much doubt that you
> have actually sat down for five days to 'research and test stuff'
> and out of it written a poem for which you have received
> remuneration.

Or maybe you do mean to not be taken seriously and be simply ignored
from now on. First of all, please note I said "(e.g. poetry) OR":

> > "If it takes me, say, five full days to research and test stuff in
> > order to write something that gives one million people emotions
> > (e.g. poetry) or, much more prosaically, teaches them in twenty
> > minutes how to do something they need to do

secondly, it's a good habit to check online before judging people. Had
you bothered to use a search engine, you'd have found and read why I
said "abstract and theoretical my foot" in less time than it took you
to type this last message: http://mfioretti.com

   'night