Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Copyright opinions

[Simon Ward]

On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 05:03:05PM +0000, address@hidden wrote:
> > Dear if you care to listen,

It’s hard, I’m not sure if you are reading my posts.  Please try to
quote and respond to specific points.  If you want to start a new
discussion, start a new thread.

> copyright, and that is eventually what is being talked about, not
> isolated areas like software

You can use copyright to good effect, like with free software.  There
are also movements towards free media.  These sort of freedoms are
probably universal, but let’s be clear here:

  * This mailing list is about free software
  * I use and develop software, I care about software
  * I also happen to care about other stuff, but I’m talking about free
    software, here, on this free software list.

Copyright is different for different works.  In many cases copyright on
software has its own terms, but in UK law it is partially lumped in with
“literary” works.  There is no reason why copyright can not be (more)
different for software.  I have already suggested that copyright terms
should be different for software because of its nature.

Richard Stallman has several essays on copyright, but I suggest you read
at least “Misinterpreting Copyright—A Series of Errors”[1] and
“Copyright and Globalization in the Age of Computer Networks”[2].  These
are also available in the book “Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman”[3] which you can purchase (Manchester
Free Software still have some copies, I believe), or download.

[1]: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/misinterpreting-copyright.html
[2]: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/copyright-and-globalization.html
[3]: http://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/

> is governed by law and validated by the country it is registered in.

Proposed changes are fairly universal, but mostly applicable to the UK
where I have the most knowledge.

One aim is to improve copyright law, everywhere.  Trying to convince one
jurisdiction to change their laws will also work a lot better if there
are other jurisdictions that have changed, or propose to change.

> Individuals want paying for what they do

They should charge for what they do.  If you think the effort you put in
is monstrous, charge a monstrous fee.  I have no problem with that.

> and if that involves repeat payments then o.k.

Repeat payments are not okay if you subjugate people to get them.  As
discussed, this often involves locking people in, and restricting what
they can do.

I have the same issue with music and video, where digital restrictions
management (DRM) seems to be more prevalent, but again, I’m about free
software here.

Simon
-- 
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature