[p2p-research] Repurposing Profit for User Freedom

[Ryan Lanham]

On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 1:00 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 11:13 PM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>>  On 2/5/10, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> but I am never arguing for that, so I find it strange that you always
>>> bring that up ...
>>>
>>
>>
>> Excellent.  Then we can agree coercive state socialism (as in Cuba, China
>> or Venezeula) is not something either of us support.  And that people have
>> the right to property both real and intellectual and the right to protect
>> that property through mechanisms of the state.
>>
> a few caveats, yes I do not support coercive state socialism, but I don't
> think China falls in any way under that rubric anymore, and neither does
> Venezuela, whose economy is neither socialist, nor its state particularly
> centrally state socialism coercive ... one has to keep a sense of proportion
> even as I'm sure there are many issues in Venezuela I'm sure ...
>
> and we should be open to any redeeming features (say Cuba's extraordinarily
> agrarian revival, Venezuela's extraordinary success in upping welfare levels
> for the majority of the population, China's economic success, etc...)
>
> I'm sure you agree that even though the U.S. is now a banana republic, it
> still has many redeeming features, <g>
>
> Michel
>
>
Hi Michel,

I think we agree coercion is wrong.  And that coercion means a state or
organization forcing membership and participation.  I look forward to
discussions of particular approaches in these societies.

Whether enforcement of IP is a form of coercion is an interesting argument.
To me, it is a conflicting rights argument--always the most interesting
legal arguments.  I have a clear view on the conflict which I often do not
have.  I am happy to have some states reject the idea of enforcing IP -- the
Cayman Islands does not recognize certain copyrights, and to let the chips
fall where they may.  There are plenty of laws and treaties in these areas.
I think the system will evolve to fit what makes most sense.   I have heard
repeatedly from informed persons in other channels including within our
government at senior levels that enforcement is a necessity and compelling
in both pragmatic and fundamental terms.  As a pragmatist, I don't hold
fundamental views.

Let me contrast IP with, say, ganja laws in the US.  I don't use ganja, but
I think criminalizing it (and most other illegal drugs) is silly as most
libertarians argue it is.  I'm not afraid to criticize standing laws or even
to ignore them.  This isn't about some sort of legal compliance
issue...though I do believe strongly in rule of law and in general
compliance.  In that I suppose I differ markedly from anarchists, but I have
always found anarchism worthy of moral and intellectual rejection. I still
do.  As I've said, I find it internally consistent, I simply disagree with
it fundamentally as I understand it and have read it from its well-known
theorists.  I find libertarianism much more compelling, but I don't find
libertarianism internally coherent.

IP is very different for me.  Yes it protects some multinational
corporations, but my view is that it is better for small artists (in all
fields) than any other system.  I have grave doubts about your tax idea...it
creates terrible distortions.  I think corporations need controls, but I
think the basic idea of corporations and their advocacy is quite sound and
very desirable...as both for profit and nonprofit entities.  As I continue
to read them, I would say my own ideas are quite close to Larry Lessig's.
Just to state a position as clearly and openly as possible.

With regard to the US, it is a great country and my country.  It has many
problems.  I am still at home with it, proud of it, and willing to accept
and defend it, bananas and all.

R.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20100206/e87b8df4/attachment.html>