Tuesday, June 21, 2005

Politically incorrect

 I´m aware that may be not pollitically correct to say that, but what is the idea behind Creative Commons licences? Okay, I understand that people who earn their living writing may be afraid to be copied their valuable work, but It seems to me hilarious that blogs like mine and yours claim for a sort of "license". Maybe bestsellers like Tom Clancy or Isabel Allende may be interested to "protect" (and I doubt they can do it) their writings, there are extreme cases like J. P. Salinger, if you even write his name you are in danger to be sued, however every Salinger book that I had read, I had obtaines in the web, illegally, of course.

So what is the purpose to claim certain "rigths" on the trivialities that we write daily in blogs? I think that those ideas only strenght among common people the ideology from the big editorials and entertainment industry: that people has sort of natural rigths on every single thing that they can write, or sing or whatever.

But the Internet spirit has been always opposite, freedom to copy for masses, even being illegal. I said at first, may sound pollitically incorrect to endorse something ilegal, but is the reality. Slavery was also legal in the past and when we live under dictatorship here in Chile, we experienced many unfair or stupid laws, may we obbey blindly even stupid laws?.

The strongest support of any law is the punish: without trials and jails very few laws would survive and, as long as technology allow to broke laws with no practical consecuences, people will begin to disrespect them. Frankly speaking I had no guilt sentiment infracting copyrigth laws. So, acording with this idea I wrote my own:

"Not so Creative and Uncommon License

The contents of this weblog are not protected under any kind of licence, so please fell free to copy (just as I does) anything you wish. However in sake of basic good manners I kindly advise you to mention the source, if not you are exposed to receive the old curse from my gipsy ancestors, you surely will catch AIDS and may every tooth will fall apart from your mounth!"

Which I added to my blogs to unprotect them from any of my hipotetical copyrigths<


DCveR said...

Now you are not being reasonable... just take a look at Hollywood, all those poor movie stars starving, without money because people are copying DVDs, all the rock stars begging because your mp3 downloads...

Yes, I am being sarcastic. After all even mp3 downloading is a double bladed knife. It is true that the music industry loses some sales, but it is also true that due to the ease of access to new musics a lot of new bands earn new markets, make more gigs, etc... And if the CDs and DVDs weren't so expensive people would buy more originals. Anyway, the merchandise alone makes enough profit for the whole industry, thus: I am not sorry for them!

Tomas Bradanovic said...

I agree, even accepting all claims of unfairness or "comunism" from big companies as true, as long as people can obtain some for free they always will do it, it is technically impossible to avoid CD or Internet material to be copied, so I guess that if they want to "protect" their rigths, they must simply stop to publish in Internet or any electronic/magnetic media.

Anything published in electronic media is esentially copiable, free copy without permission is the spirit of Internet!

Shyha said...

Even analog sources can be easily copied (via audio output for exemple). Quality would be a little lower but it's not a problem to make a copy anyway.
And I agree with both of you (and generally with Tombrad too).
One thing: if I like the music - I buy it. I like to have nice CD box with nice inlet etc. :)

Shyha said...

ow. my mistake :) I didn't noticed that one of you is blog owner :) so I agree with both of you


Tomas Bradanovic said...


My point is that creative commons licenses may turn into a great psicological tool in order to convince to the common people about the validity of "intelectual rigths". So common people, once convinced than they have "rigths" on their trivial writings may be more willing to defend big companies rigths also. A perfect spin.

My point is that intelectual rigths are obsolete because they are based in a intermediaries-oriented model, those intermediaries are no longer needed for more and more creators. We may simply copy everithing we wish (and we can of course).

Diferent matter are GNU licenses which protects exactly the opposite; that a company patent public domain software. Those licences are Ok in my view, but I think that we, common people, may reject any effort aimed to protect the
"intelectual property"

Anonymous said...

A bizarre poster! [Art work--I do not know the Spanish word.] (The only communists left in the world teach at US universities.)

Where do you find these cultural artifacts, Tomas? You must stay away from crazy people, my father told me.

Be careful.


Tomas Bradanovic said...

Lalo, poster is OK, it is used in spanish too!

Well, My father told me the same as your and I take good care to do the exactly opposed he said!

Anyway It is a nice poster "copy mp3s and youll be supporting communism!!" hahaha, hilarious!