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

[Kevin Carson]

On 2/3/10, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:

> 1) I agree with Ryan that it is more beneficial to create open and free as
> an option, than as coercion. In other words, I find it acceptable to have
> moderate IP as a choice for those who wish so. The only way to impose open
> and free in a world where many if not most individuals wish to protect their
> creations would be through dictatorial coercion.

I think this frames the issue almost totally backward.  By definition,
the non-coercive alternative is open, because it requires coercive
enforcement to stop people from copying what they want.   People who
believe in proprietary content should have the option of adhering to
it as a choice, by voluntarily refraining from using content that
other people claim a "copyright" on.  But they should not be able  to
use coercion in imposing copyright on those who  do not recognize it,
and forcibly preventing them from reproducing content.

-- 
Kevin Carson
Center for a Stateless Society http://c4ss.org
Mutualist Blog:  Free Market Anti-Capitalism
http://mutualist.blogspot.com
Studies in Mutualist Political Economy
http://www.mutualist.org/id47.html
Organization Theory:  A Libertarian Perspective
http://mutualist.blogspot.com/2005/12/studies-in-anarchist-theory-of.html