From muguet at mdpi.net Sat Feb 21 07:21:25 2009 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2009 07:21:25 +0100 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for content remuneration In-Reply-To: References: <496A9267.8060503@mdpi.net> Message-ID: <499F9D65.20104@mdpi.net> Dear Richard Sorry for my belated answer, I have been on trips and then got a sciatica... > I think it is a mistake to describe such plans as "remuneration", > because that term implies paying someone for work done. In effect, it > endorses the idea that we _owe_ these payments for using the works. > What term would you suggest, for non-native english speaker, it is very hard to find the right word, all the more that there are many "faux amis" between English and French, same name but different meaning ( eg retribution ! ) payment for the appreciation of the work.... remun?ration is OK in French because it is very general Compensation does not work either ? what word would you use in English ? > To conceive of this payment as something we owe implies that we owe it > to specific artists, the ones who did the works we used. Thus, > this conception of "remuneration" argues against the idea you are > proposing, of letting the user choose to allocate the money. > exactly > At the operational level, internet users pay a mandatory fixed contract > sum ( not a tax fee) > > Why do you want it to be a contract sum and not a tax? > because a tax, in legal terms ( and I am sure of this, this time in English ) is something is something paid to the state > that is collected by Internet Service Providers > (ISPs) and sent > to the various copyright collectives > or copyright > collection societies > > and performing rights organizations > . > > Why involve these organizations? That just makes trouble. > These organizations have their own rules, and if you don't want > to follow their rules, involving them in the plan only makes another > obstacle. > Intellectually they are not needed, and If I could avoid them, the better It is for the legal architecture of the scheme, so that the scheme could be implemented through dispositions within contracts. > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Concerning content creators, > > The words "content" and "creators" are words it is better to avoid. > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html for explanation. > > We will not go into gory details in > this introduction, > so what words would you suggest ? > You have already gone into far more gory detail about identifying each > work than is really needed. Unfortunately, details are needed. There are even more cumbersome details... ( for example composite works ) so that law makers can adopt a practical law; otherwise the whole scheme will be attacked as "unpractical"... > And since I have never heard of any of > these codes, and know nothing about them, these details have told me > nothing. The only information I can really understand in this whole > paragraph is this: > > complex distribution of money among various stakeholders such as > authors, performers, interpreters, remixer, etc. > > although I am not sure what role interpreters Yes.. yes.. interpreters ( not translantors , eg actors, singers of somebody else song, dancers; etc... ) are very adament that they do play a very important role.... !!! > play in art. > Are you thinking about dubbing movies in another language? > translators is yet another story... > (that should never exceed a > set limit, eg. 15%) of the fixed compulsory amount. > > What is the motive for this limit? > to limit the "fan club" effect.... do remember that they are many feeble people on this planet that are easily manipulated ( and unfortunately do vote... ) > I do not say it is bad, I just don't see the purpose. > > All the best Francis -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA/KNIS http://knis.org 32 Blvd Victor 75739 PARIS cedex FRANCE Phone: (33)1 45 52 60 19 Fax: (33)1 45 52 52 82 muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet PC4D : http://www.pc4d.org World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web Info. Net. Govermance : http://www.wsis-gov.org web NET4D : http://www.net4D.org UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS : http://www.wtis.org REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org ------------------------------------------------------ Legal notice : Except stated explicitely, this message shall not be construed as the official position of above mentionned entities Notice l?gale ; A moins que cela ne soit explicitement indiqu?, ce message ne constitue la position officielle des entit?s mentionn?es ci-dessos ------------------------------------------------------- From rms at gnu.org Sat Feb 21 18:41:00 2009 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard M Stallman) Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2009 12:41:00 -0500 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: <499F9D65.20104@mdpi.net> (muguet@mdpi.net) References: <499F9D65.20104@mdpi.net> Message-ID: > I think it is a mistake to describe such plans as "remuneration", > because that term implies paying someone for work done. In effect, it > endorses the idea that we _owe_ these payments for using the works. > What term would you suggest, I would call it "support" or "financial support". (See the changed subject of this message.) payment for the appreciation of the work.... That has the same problem as "remuneration". It implies we _owe money_ for appreciating the work. Compensation does not work either ? "Compensation" refers to (1) what you pay a worker for working, or (2) making up for danage you have done. Those are exactly the ideas we don't want here. > Why do you want it to be a contract sum and not a tax? > because a tax, in legal terms ( and I am sure of this, this time in English ) is something is something paid to the state Isn't that the idea? This money should be collected by the state, so it is a tax, isn't it? > The words "content" and "creators" are words it is better to avoid. > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html for explanation. so what words would you suggest ? I would speak of "works" and their "authors" and "artists". > although I am not sure what role interpreters Yes.. yes.. interpreters ( not translantors , eg actors, singers of somebody else song, dancers; etc... ) are very adament that they do play a very important role.... !!! In English, "interpreter" except in a very special context can only mean someone who translates verbally from one language to another. You can say "the musician interpreted the piece", but people won't get that meaning unless you make it as explicit as that. From muguet at mdpi.net Sat Feb 21 22:29:20 2009 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2009 22:29:20 +0100 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: References: <499F9D65.20104@mdpi.net> Message-ID: <49A07230.3070807@mdpi.net> Hello Richard > > I think it is a mistake to describe such plans as "remuneration", > > because that term implies paying someone for work done. In effect, it > > endorses the idea that we _owe_ these payments for using the works. > > > What term would you suggest, > > I would call it "support" or "financial support". > Yes, this seems the right term to adopt > (See the changed subject of this message.) > > payment for the appreciation of the work.... > > That has the same problem as "remuneration". It implies we _owe > money_ for appreciating the work. > > Compensation does not work either ? > > "Compensation" refers to (1) what you pay a worker for working, or (2) > making up for danage you have done. Those are exactly the ideas we > don't want here. > > Thanks for the clarification > > Why do you want it to be a contract sum and not a tax? > > > because a tax, in legal terms ( and I am sure of this, this time in > English ) is something > is something paid to the state > > Isn't that the idea? This money should be collected by the state, > so it is a tax, isn't it? > Not exactly, the idea to keep the role of the state to a minimum, outside its greedy hands. The state simply enacts a law that introduce dispositions in contracts between users and ISP, on one hand, authors and their collecting agencing on the other end; to the effect of establishing a legal linkage between users and authors for their financial support. The money is not collected by the state, the money goes from the users to the authors directly. > > The words "content" and "creators" are words it is better to avoid. > > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html for explanation. > > so what words would you suggest ? > > I would speak of "works" OK > and their "authors" and "artists". > OK, but is a translator an artist ? ( if he/she is good one, may be.... ) > > although I am not sure what role interpreters > Yes.. yes.. interpreters ( not translantors , eg actors, singers of > somebody else song, dancers; > etc... ) are very adament that they do > play a very important role.... !!! > > In English, "interpreter" except in a very special context can only > mean someone who translates verbally from one language to another. > OK, then it is a "faux-amis" interpr?te in French includes actors, musician, dancers and translators, so what would be the word in english corresponding to interpr?te ? according to my Harrap's French-English dictionary interpr?te in this global sense is translated as exponent, interpreter ( of music, theatrical part... ) > You can say "the musician interpreted the piece", but people won't > get that meaning unless you make it as explicit as that. > > > then, may be, we should be more specific. -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA/KNIS http://knis.org 32 Blvd Victor 75739 PARIS cedex FRANCE Phone: (33)1 45 52 60 19 Fax: (33)1 45 52 52 82 muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet PC4D : http://www.pc4d.org World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web Info. Net. Govermance : http://www.wsis-gov.org web NET4D : http://www.net4D.org UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS : http://www.wtis.org REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org ------------------------------------------------------ Legal notice : Except stated explicitely, this message shall not be construed as the official position of above mentionned entities Notice l?gale ; A moins que cela ne soit explicitement indiqu?, ce message ne constitue la position officielle des entit?s mentionn?es ci-dessos ------------------------------------------------------- From muguet at mdpi.net Sun Feb 22 00:31:15 2009 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 00:31:15 +0100 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: References: <499F9D65.20104@mdpi.net> <49A07230.3070807@mdpi.net> Message-ID: <49A08EC3.5030902@mdpi.net> Enrique Chaparro wrote: > > > AFAICT, "performer" is the English word that best conveys > the idea Right, Muchas Gracias Enrique ! > of "interpr?te" ("int?rprete" in Spanish, which is also > ambiguous with "translator" in verbal/real-time contexts). > > Regards, > > Enrique > > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA/KNIS http://knis.org 32 Blvd Victor 75739 PARIS cedex FRANCE Phone: (33)1 45 52 60 19 Fax: (33)1 45 52 52 82 muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet PC4D : http://www.pc4d.org World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web Info. Net. Govermance : http://www.wsis-gov.org web NET4D : http://www.net4D.org UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS : http://www.wtis.org REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org ------------------------------------------------------ Legal notice : Except stated explicitely, this message shall not be construed as the official position of above mentionned entities Notice l?gale ; A moins que cela ne soit explicitement indiqu?, ce message ne constitue la position officielle des entit?s mentionn?es ci-dessos ------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/wsis-pct/attachments/20090222/56e399ac/attachment.htm From rms at gnu.org Sun Feb 22 15:35:38 2009 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard M Stallman) Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 09:35:38 -0500 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: <49A07230.3070807@mdpi.net> (muguet@mdpi.net) References: <49A07230.3070807@mdpi.net> Message-ID: > Isn't that the idea? This money should be collected by the state, > so it is a tax, isn't it? > Not exactly, the idea to keep the role of the state to a minimum, outside its greedy hands. I can't support that approach. The collecting societies are much worse than the state. The collecting societies are not even theoretically responsible to the public. They do not reveal what they do with the money they get. Some of them lobby for stricter copyright laws. If they give any money to authors, they will insist on distributing it in linear proportion to popularity. The money is not collected by the state, the money goes from the users to the authors directly. Either it goes to the authors directly, or it goes to the collecting societies -- it cannot be both. I think the state must be the one to collect the money and distribute it to authors and artists. We cannot trust collecting societies to do this. From rusdiah at rad.net.id Mon Feb 23 04:30:53 2009 From: rusdiah at rad.net.id (rusdiah) Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 10:30:53 +0700 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: References: <49A07230.3070807@mdpi.net> Message-ID: <49A2186D.3040302@rad.net.id> this seems what happened in Indonesia with music... and we are afraid... what richard's worried with private collecting agencies ? Probably in this case... the state is more mature institutionally and has more proper regulatory means... (ie: tax collections) note: better regulatory or more mature... does not means perfect. regards, rudi rusdiah Richard M Stallman wrote: > > Isn't that the idea? This money should be collected by the state, > > so it is a tax, isn't it? > > > Not exactly, the idea to keep the role of the state to a minimum, > outside its greedy hands. > > I can't support that approach. The collecting societies are much > worse than the state. > > The collecting societies are not even theoretically responsible to the > public. They do not reveal what they do with the money they get. > Some of them lobby for stricter copyright laws. If they give any > money to authors, they will insist on distributing it in linear > proportion to popularity. > > The money is not collected by the state, the money goes from the users > to the authors directly. > > Either it goes to the authors directly, or it goes to the collecting > societies -- it cannot be both. > > I think the state must be the one to collect the money and distribute > it to authors and artists. We cannot trust collecting societies to do > this. From muguet at mdpi.net Tue Feb 24 18:59:48 2009 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 18:59:48 +0100 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: References: <49A07230.3070807@mdpi.net> Message-ID: <49A43594.3040700@mdpi.net> Hello > > Isn't that the idea? This money should be collected by the state, > > so it is a tax, isn't it? > > > Not exactly, the idea to keep the role of the state to a minimum, > outside its greedy hands. > > First a legal difference a tax is a sum collected by the state for its own purpose. by law, at least in France, the revenue of a tax cannot be affected to a specific ressource a fee ( redevance in French, may be mistranslated as a fee ) is a sum of money collected by the state for the sake of a third party. so, at least in France, it could not be a tax, possibly a "redevance" The TV redevance is very unpopular, and I am afraid that if the patronage is assimilated with a redevance, this is a non-starter. > I can't support that approach. The collecting societies are much > worse than the state. > > The collecting societies are not even theoretically responsible to the > public. This is correct. They are supposedly responsible to their affiliates : artists & authors, but in fact acts like feudal lords. SACEM is a very bad example. > They do not reveal what they do with the money they get. > Some of them lobby for stricter copyright laws. Correct. > If they give any > money to authors, they will insist on distributing it in linear > proportion to popularity. > they shall receive money for artist XYZ, they shall only act as recipient, or account manager, that's all. they shall no say on how the patronage money is distributed, their role shall be strictly limited. Now to address your just concern, the legal dispositions introduced in the contracts bewteen the artists and collecting agencies must impose a complete transparency and accontability of the sums that have been given by internet users for the financial support of authors and artists, It might be possible to envision a multistakeholder authority ( governement, authors, civil society ) to oversee and check the implementation. I have a certain, yet very limited, confidence into the legislative body that would enact those compulsory dispostions into contracts to enable the patronage mechanism. but I have no confidence at all in the executive branch, where a decree under the influence of a lobby may alter the pratical way, and the amount of money collected by the state. Now, the situation may be dependent on each national context The global patronage mechanism must adapt and must rely on the partner that may be best trusted. It is possible that in the USA, the executive branch might be trusted, then in this case, this could be the best practical solution. We have to define the patronage mechanism in such flexible way that it could be adapted to each national context All the best Francis > The money is not collected by the state, the money goes from the users > to the authors directly. > > Either it goes to the authors directly, or it goes to the collecting > societies -- it cannot be both. > > I think the state must be the one to collect the money and distribute > it to authors and artists. We cannot trust collecting societies to do > this. > > > > > > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA/KNIS http://knis.org 32 Blvd Victor 75739 PARIS cedex FRANCE Phone: (33)1 45 52 60 19 Fax: (33)1 45 52 52 82 muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet PC4D : http://www.pc4d.org World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web Info. Net. Govermance : http://www.wsis-gov.org web NET4D : http://www.net4D.org UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS : http://www.wtis.org REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org ------------------------------------------------------ From rms at gnu.org Wed Feb 25 16:53:34 2009 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard M Stallman) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:53:34 -0500 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: <49A43594.3040700@mdpi.net> (muguet@mdpi.net) References: <49A43594.3040700@mdpi.net> Message-ID: The TV redevance is very unpopular, and I am afraid that if the patronage is assimilated with a redevance, this is a non-starter. If the money is collected by the state and given to collecting societies, won't that be a redevance too? If not, why not? The existing collecting societies may pretend to be responsible to their members, but that is not true in any serious way. We cannot trust them at all, and I am against involving them at all. I have a certain, yet very limited, confidence into the legislative body that would enact those compulsory dispostions into contracts to enable the patronage mechanism. but I have no confidence at all in the executive branch, where a decree under the influence of a lobby may alter the pratical way, and the amount of money collected by the state. That question is orthogonal to the others. I agree we may want to fix some (or many) of the details of this system explicitly in law. That is orthogonal to the question of what those details should be, how the system should work. From muguet at mdpi.net Wed Feb 25 17:08:54 2009 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:08:54 +0100 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: References: <49A43594.3040700@mdpi.net> Message-ID: <49A56D16.7070808@mdpi.net> Richard M Stallman wrote: > The TV redevance is very unpopular, and I am afraid that if the patronage > is assimilated with a redevance, this is a non-starter. > > If the money is collected by the state and given to collecting societies, > won't that be a redevance too? > yes Exactly, it is probably what the state is going to do. If the money is collected by the ISP and given as directly as possibly, with the minimal intervention of collecting agencies to the authors, that would be tolerable of course the best way is that the money is collected by the ISPs is given directly to the authors. I am not sure if ISP would have the skills to perform such a distribution and this would be legally feasible. > If not, why not? > > The existing collecting societies may pretend to be responsible to > their members, but that is not true in any serious way. We cannot > trust them at all, and I am against involving them at all. > > I have a certain, yet very limited, confidence into the legislative > body that would > enact those compulsory dispostions into contracts to enable the > patronage mechanism. > > but I have no confidence at all in the executive branch, where a decree > under > the influence of a lobby may alter the pratical way, and the amount of > money collected > by the state. > > That question is orthogonal to the others. I agree we may want > to fix some (or many) of the details of this system explicitly in law. > > That is orthogonal to the question of what those details should be, > how the system should work. > > Agreed The first step is to enact of set of universal principles, and then customize the details depending on the legal system of each country. -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA/KNIS http://knis.org 32 Blvd Victor 75739 PARIS cedex FRANCE Phone: (33)1 45 52 60 19 Fax: (33)1 45 52 52 82 muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet PC4D : http://www.pc4d.org World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web Info. Net. Govermance : http://www.wsis-gov.org web NET4D : http://www.net4D.org UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS : http://www.wtis.org REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org ------------------------------------------------------ From fheinz at vialibre.org.ar Wed Feb 25 17:21:46 2009 From: fheinz at vialibre.org.ar (Federico Heinz) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:21:46 -0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: References: <49A43594.3040700@mdpi.net> Message-ID: <20090225142146.060cdeb3@lauren> I'm afraid that this discussion just points out a flaw in an otherwise interesting scheme, a flaw that I fear may not be easy to fix (if it is possible at all). The problem arises every time we take money from a large number of people to be managed by some centralized instance(s): corruption ensues. It doesn't really matter whether this centralized instance is private or public, or how it is managed: concentration of money means concentration of power, and power corrupts. Fact of life, and I am not aware that anyone has figured out a reliable way to avoid it. So unless we can figure out a way to decentralize (and I mean to *massively* decentralize) the decision of who gets the money, I fear that the whole concept will cause more grief than joy. Fede From muguet at mdpi.net Wed Feb 25 18:03:22 2009 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 18:03:22 +0100 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: <20090225142146.060cdeb3@lauren> References: <49A43594.3040700@mdpi.net> <20090225142146.060cdeb3@lauren> Message-ID: <49A579DA.30809@mdpi.net> Caro Federico > So unless we can figure out a way to decentralize (and I mean to *massively* > decentralize) the decision of who gets the money, I fear that the whole concept > will cause more grief than joy. > The decision of whom is getting the money is made by users directly ( check Global Patronage web site ) and this is a BIG _conceptual_ difference with the global license. Now how the money is collected, how much "managing fee" are going to be taken ( stolen ) from the artists by those who are collecting the money is yet another question, a _practicai _question. The SACEM in France has an extravagant lifestyle. This fee must be reasonnable shall be determined by the legislative body, and not by decree. Francis > Fede > _______________________________________________ > WSIS-PCT mailing list > WSIS-PCT at fsfeurope.org > https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/wsis-pct > > > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA/KNIS http://knis.org 32 Blvd Victor 75739 PARIS cedex FRANCE Phone: (33)1 45 52 60 19 Fax: (33)1 45 52 52 82 muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet PC4D : http://www.pc4d.org World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web Info. Net. Govermance : http://www.wsis-gov.org web NET4D : http://www.net4D.org UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS : http://www.wtis.org REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org ------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/wsis-pct/attachments/20090225/a2f0894e/attachment.htm From fheinz at vialibre.org.ar Wed Feb 25 20:22:33 2009 From: fheinz at vialibre.org.ar (Federico Heinz) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:22:33 -0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: <49A579DA.30809@mdpi.net> References: <49A43594.3040700@mdpi.net> <20090225142146.060cdeb3@lauren> <49A579DA.30809@mdpi.net> Message-ID: <20090225172233.5faf2148@lauren> On 25/02/2009, Dr. Francis MUGUET wrote: > The decision of whom is getting the money is made by users directly ( > check Global Patronage web site ) and this is a BIG > _conceptual_ difference with the global license. Yes, but the idea of doing this through a web form is impracticable and probably unfair, because it is directly connected with popularity --- patronage should be connected to popularity, but not linearly, otherwise only famous artists will get any money at all. I say it is impracticable because of 1) security (how do we make sure that the database actually reflects the user's choice, and not those of whoever wrote the worm du jour?) and 2) overhead (keeping one's choices up to date is a chore that most people would neglect). We need some automatic way of measuring access to media without user intervention. These measurements could then be used to non-linearly allocate funds in such a way that no-one earns more than, say, five times as much as those who earn the least amount. Of course, if you follow the distribution pattern of such a scheme as ever more people become authors of some sort, it eventually converges mostly on getting money from everyone to distribute it among everyone... not the worthiest endeavour to pursue. I feel that this idea, while enticing, is a very complicated way of solving a problem that we don't know is even there. Free software has thrived without any such mechanism. This does not mean that all other "fields of creative endeavour" will do as well in a similar way, but I don't see that "artists" as a group are suffering due to digital distribution... rather the contrary. Maybe we should wait until something actually breaks before we offer a way to fix it? Fede From rms at gnu.org Thu Feb 26 20:25:49 2009 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard M Stallman) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 14:25:49 -0500 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: <20090225172233.5faf2148@lauren> (message from Federico Heinz on Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:22:33 -0200) References: <20090225172233.5faf2148@lauren> Message-ID: We need some automatic way of measuring access to media without user intervention. I suggest using sampling to measure popularity. That avoids the need to monitor everyone. Maybe we should wait until something actually breaks before we offer a way to fix it? Copyright law has already broken this aspect of our society, and some of our computers. From rms at gnu.org Thu Feb 26 20:25:46 2009 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard M Stallman) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 14:25:46 -0500 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: <49A56D16.7070808@mdpi.net> (muguet@mdpi.net) References: <49A56D16.7070808@mdpi.net> Message-ID: If the money is collected by the ISP and given as directly as possibly, with the minimal intervention of collecting agencies to the authors, that would be tolerable To involve the collecting society is asking for trouble. From rms at gnu.org Thu Feb 26 20:26:38 2009 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard M Stallman) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 14:26:38 -0500 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: <20090225142146.060cdeb3@lauren> (message from Federico Heinz on Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:21:46 -0200) References: <20090225142146.060cdeb3@lauren> Message-ID: The problem arises every time we take money from a large number of people to be managed by some centralized instance(s): corruption ensues. We do not need perfection. We do not need to reduce corruption to zero to make this program good and effective. We only need to keep the corruption down to a small fraction of the total. The argument you are making, if it were valid, would call for abolition of all public welfare payment systems. If we do not consider that conclusion valid for them, why should we accept it here? From fheinz at vialibre.org.ar Thu Feb 26 21:40:19 2009 From: fheinz at vialibre.org.ar (Federico Heinz) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 18:40:19 -0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: References: <20090225172233.5faf2148@lauren> Message-ID: <20090226184019.0f6b4705@lauren> On 26/02/2009, Richard M Stallman wrote: > Maybe we should wait until something actually breaks before we offer a > way to fix it? > Copyright law has already broken this aspect of our society, and some > of our computers. I agree wholeheartedly. But this proposal won't fix that. This proposal is aimed towards fixing what seems to me to be non-existent problem: how to get culture funded. As far as I can tell, culture is thriving, and artists are doing better today than they ever did, not just despite but probably *because* their works can spread easily and inexpensively, even music labels are showing consistent growth (much as I wish they didn't). I therefore see no need to force a levy onto users of broadband to provide funds to people who don't seem to be having much trouble getting them in the first place. Fede From fheinz at vialibre.org.ar Thu Feb 26 21:42:29 2009 From: fheinz at vialibre.org.ar (Federico Heinz) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 18:42:29 -0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: References: <20090225142146.060cdeb3@lauren> Message-ID: <20090226184229.7adea4fe@lauren> On 26/02/2009, Richard M Stallman wrote: > The argument you are making, if it were valid, would call for > abolition of all public welfare payment systems. If we do not > consider that conclusion valid for them, why should we accept it here? Those systems are necessary enough to go through the trouble of making them reasonably corruption-free (for carefully chosen values of "reasonably"). This mechanism does not address any pressing need, it's not about sheltering the homeless, feeding the hungry, curing the sick. So why bother? Fede From move at cooperation.net Fri Feb 27 11:48:54 2009 From: move at cooperation.net (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Th=E9o_Bondolfi?=) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 11:48:54 +0100 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global patronage - Swiss recycling tax & suggestions In-Reply-To: References: <20090225142146.060cdeb3@lauren> Message-ID: <49A7C516.3000808@cooperation.net> Dear Richard, dear Francis, dear all although I'm not taking part directly in this debate, I plainly support the issue of developing a global patronage approach, and appreciate a lot to learn from your points of view if information, as air and water, is a common good, then it's quality has to be protected by all possible measures other suggestions to inspire the debate : - social economy models (comon good in information society), - promoting adoption of "tobin tax" for auctions selling/buying ? - empowering culture of donation such as FSF or wikipedia campaigns ? what about encouraging also the inclusion of a "digital inclusion %" within the emerging hardware recycling policies in Switzerland, for each device we buy, a recylcing tax is introduced since 2005, and it could include a % for pratonizing FreeCulture projects Swiss gov is investing in a global policy promotion to have all countries, including developing countries, introducing this tax for computer devices. It was introduced recently, with support of Swiss funds, in South Africa, look at http://ewasteguide.info/ That might help to design a Patronage policy framework Best regards Th?o Bondolfi - profile at www.ynternet.org/move Coach & trainer in eCulture / Chairman of Ynternet.org Branche 17 - 1091 Grandvaux - Switzerland Cell. + 41 76 3769776 - Office + 41 21 311 30 47 Richard M Stallman a ?crit : > The problem arises every time we take money from a large number of people to be > managed by some centralized instance(s): corruption ensues. > > We do not need perfection. We do not need to reduce corruption to > zero to make this program good and effective. We only need to keep > the corruption down to a small fraction of the total. > > The argument you are making, if it were valid, would call for > abolition of all public welfare payment systems. If we do not > consider that conclusion valid for them, why should we accept it here? > > _______________________________________________ > WSIS-PCT mailing list > WSIS-PCT at fsfeurope.org > https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/wsis-pct > From muguet at mdpi.net Fri Feb 27 16:58:22 2009 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 16:58:22 +0100 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: <20090225172233.5faf2148@lauren> References: <49A43594.3040700@mdpi.net> <20090225142146.060cdeb3@lauren> <49A579DA.30809@mdpi.net> <20090225172233.5faf2148@lauren> Message-ID: <49A80D9E.6060503@mdpi.net> Dear Federico > On 25/02/2009, Dr. Francis MUGUET wrote: > >> The decision of whom is getting the money is made by users directly ( >> check Global Patronage web site ) and this is a BIG >> _conceptual_ difference with the global license. >> > > Yes, but the idea of doing this through a web form is impracticable and > probably unfair, because it is directly connected with popularity Popularity is driving democratic elections as well ! This does not mean Demcracy is the ultimate political system. As Churchill put it : /Democracy is the worst regime, but we do not any one better/ Yes, there will be fan clubs, but also many more clever people, conscious citizens that would allocate a fair share to starving artist in need insteand of giving money to celebrities that are spending cash in an obscene way. > --- patronage > should be connected to popularity, but not linearly, otherwise only famous > artists will get any money at all. > > I say it is impracticable because of 1) security (how do we make sure that the > database actually reflects the user's choice, and not those of whoever wrote > the worm du jour?) and 2) overhead (keeping one's choices up to date is a chore > that most people would neglect). > The ISP are maintaing relatively well their customer account online interface ( line setting, invoice, etc... ) The entry of user choice should be made using the same interface. whcih is relatively secure because on the ISP intranet. Practical and cheap. This draws to another point. When one exposes a model in practiical details, some are saying let us concentre on the principle, and it is true that trees may hide the forest... but when one expose a model in general terms, there is always somebody to crtiicize on details... This makes presenting a model a difficult task > We need some automatic way of measuring access to media without user > intervention. You are falling of the trap of the idea of consumption. No need of measuring access The patronage idea is post-consumer society ( I would dare to say post-capitalist ) The patronage concept is to give financial support upon users's appreciation. One may access to bad content that one does NOT want to give financial support. Patronage is well adapted to things that are digital, because you taste it, using it, share it, without depriving other of its use ( it is not like a piece of bread ) > These measurements could then be used to non-linearly this non-linearity is overly complicated, and would be a way to trich the users' choice, > allocate > funds in such a way that no-one earns more than, say, five times as much as > those who earn the least amount. Just investigate further how impractical this proposal is How you would you compare 5 minutes of work of X who spent 2 minutes to produce vs 5 minutes of work Y who spent 3 years to produce. Alos you underestimate the cleverness of crooks to get over this scheme, You try to correct in a complicated way a principle that is wrong : the principle of consumption. Lets start with a sane principle and let keep it simple ( KISS ! ) > Of course, if you follow the distribution > pattern of such a scheme as ever more people become authors of some sort, it > eventually converges mostly on getting money from everyone to distribute it > among everyone... and so what..... I do not understand... why not encorage as many artists as possible ! > not the worthiest endeavour to pursue. > > I feel that this idea, while enticing, is a very complicated way of solving a > problem that we don't know is even there. > Free software has thrived without any > such mechanism. You are comparing apple and orange, and besides Free Software has been able to thrive because of the existence of formal legal tools : licence sur as the GPL > This does not mean that all other "fields of creative > endeavour" will do as well in a similar way, but I don't see that "artists" as > a group are suffering due to digital distribution... rather the contrary. > > Maybe we should wait Wait... wait... until what ? until bad laws get voted... that freedom is endangered ? I am noticing many criticizms of the freedom-killing laws, but yet little practical solution being offered. So lets have one to be proposed, now if there are many other, the better ii is. Global Patronage does not claim to be THE solution but A possible solution. The more there are possible solutions, the better it is. > until something actually breaks before we offer a way to > fix it? > I have head this mottto again and again by the internet community that tried to keep its graps on power. It is a conservatory moto , in french we call it "attentisme" we are wittnessing its catastrophic effect of this ostrich point of view in the world of international finance today !!! The system is really broken and we need to fix it Best Francis > Fede > _______________________________________________ > WSIS-PCT mailing list > WSIS-PCT at fsfeurope.org > https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/wsis-pct > > > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA/KNIS http://knis.org 32 Blvd Victor 75739 PARIS cedex FRANCE Phone: (33)1 45 52 60 19 Fax: (33)1 45 52 52 82 muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet PC4D : http://www.pc4d.org World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web Info. Net. Govermance : http://www.wsis-gov.org web NET4D : http://www.net4D.org UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS : http://www.wtis.org REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org ------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/wsis-pct/attachments/20090227/7acf48a6/attachment.htm From muguet at mdpi.net Fri Feb 27 17:19:05 2009 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 17:19:05 +0100 Subject: [Wsis-pct] =?iso-8859-1?q?For_people_in_Paris_/_Derni=E8re_minute?= =?iso-8859-1?q?_=3A_Atelier_Samedi__28_F=E9vrier_apr=E8s_miid__Cr=E9ation?= =?iso-8859-1?q?_et_Internet_=3A_proposer_des_solutions?= Message-ID: <49A81279.9000508@mdpi.net> Message for people that happen to be in Paris tomorrow. I was in Geneva ( and still in Switezland, but tomorrow afternoon in Paris ) Sorry for the belated announcement. Bonsoir les amis Transfert un peu tardif de cette announce, car j'?tais ? Gen?ve pour la Gouvernance de l'Internet cette semaine, et un peu d?bord?, et avec une sciatique. J'arriverais demain, d?but d'apr?s midi pour cet atelier. Bien cordialement Francis http://www.adminet.ca/Cawailleurs/archives/816/creation-et-internet-proposer-des-solutions Cr?ation et Internet : proposer des solutions De nouveau le d?bat fait rage en France ? la veille de l'adoption finale du projet de loi Cr?ation et Internet (ou Hadopi). Tous les arguments sont ressass?s, de part et d'autre, comme dans un immense dialogue de sourds. Iniques, dangereuses, inefficaces, les mesures de suspension d'acc?s ? Internet pour des internautes pr?sum?s pirates au m?pris de la pr?somption d'innocence et des incertitudes techniques d'identification ne r?soudront en rien les probl?mes de r?mun?ration des auteurs. D?noncer, c'est bien. Expliquer l'?conomie en mutation et proposer des solutions, c'est mieux. De nouveaux mod?les ?conomiques d'exploitation des oeuvres apparaissent, un peu trop lentement certes, mais ils sont l'avenir. En outre, de nouveaux mod?les de r?mun?ration des auteurs sont propos?s, ? partir du sch?ma de la licence globale, en version am?lior?e. Ainsi Francis Muguet, chercheur ? l'ENSTA (Paris)^[1 ] a-t-il mis au point un syst?me original, le m?c?nat global, dont il a ?tay? le dispositif juridique :http://mecenat-global.org/ *Ce projet fera l'objet d'un atelier organis? par la Soci?t? fran?aise de l'Internet avec la participation de Richard Stallman : le 28 f?vrier 2009, ? l'H?tel La Louisiane, ? Paris. Les places sont compt?es. S'inscrire par courriel aupr?s de contribuer at refondation.org * -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA/KNIS http://knis.org 32 Blvd Victor 75739 PARIS cedex FRANCE Phone: (33)1 45 52 60 19 Fax: (33)1 45 52 52 82 muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet PC4D : http://www.pc4d.org World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web Info. Net. Govermance : http://www.wsis-gov.org web NET4D : http://www.net4D.org UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS : http://www.wtis.org REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org ------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/wsis-pct/attachments/20090227/af54d457/attachment-0001.htm From muguet at mdpi.net Fri Feb 27 17:38:05 2009 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 17:38:05 +0100 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: <20090226184019.0f6b4705@lauren> References: <20090225172233.5faf2148@lauren> <20090226184019.0f6b4705@lauren> Message-ID: <49A816ED.5060000@mdpi.net> Dear Federico > On 26/02/2009, Richard M Stallman wrote: > >> Maybe we should wait until something actually breaks before we offer a >> way to fix it? >> Copyright law has already broken this aspect of our society, and some >> of our computers. >> > > I agree wholeheartedly. But this proposal won't fix that. > > This proposal is aimed towards fixing what seems to me to be non-existent > problem: how to get culture funded. How are you kidding ? Tell this to artists that are barely surviving on unemployement benefits... Best Francis > As far as I can tell, culture is thriving, > and artists are doing better today than they ever did, not just despite but > probably *because* their works can spread easily and inexpensively, even music > labels are showing consistent growth (much as I wish they didn't). I therefore > see no need to force a levy onto users of broadband to provide funds to people > who don't seem to be having much trouble getting them in the first place. > > Fede > _______________________________________________ > WSIS-PCT mailing list > WSIS-PCT at fsfeurope.org > https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/wsis-pct > > > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA/KNIS http://knis.org 32 Blvd Victor 75739 PARIS cedex FRANCE Phone: (33)1 45 52 60 19 Fax: (33)1 45 52 52 82 muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet PC4D : http://www.pc4d.org World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web Info. Net. Govermance : http://www.wsis-gov.org web NET4D : http://www.net4D.org UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS : http://www.wtis.org REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org ------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/wsis-pct/attachments/20090227/53b1ae91/attachment.htm From fheinz at vialibre.org.ar Fri Feb 27 19:10:37 2009 From: fheinz at vialibre.org.ar (Federico Heinz) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 16:10:37 -0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: <49A80D9E.6060503@mdpi.net> References: <49A43594.3040700@mdpi.net> <20090225142146.060cdeb3@lauren> <49A579DA.30809@mdpi.net> <20090225172233.5faf2148@lauren> <49A80D9E.6060503@mdpi.net> Message-ID: <20090227161037.26f0d48c@lauren> On 27/02/2009, Dr. Francis MUGUET wrote: > The ISP are maintaing relatively well their customer account online > interface > ( line setting, invoice, etc... ) > The entry of user choice should be made using the same interface. > whcih is relatively secure because on the ISP intranet. > Practical and cheap. Right now, the ISP's website only offers a few technical option, and tampering with it has little reward. But if tampering with the ISPs website was a potential source of income (for example, distributing a worm that will use the customer's own computer, username and password to "vote" for a particular person), then you will realize how little of this sense of security is based on facts. > > Maybe we should wait > Wait... wait... until what ? until bad laws get voted... that freedom > is endangered ? Of course not. We should fight bad laws. But this proposal won't kill bad legislation. On the contrary, it may give those who ask for bad legislation some legitimacy ("See? We are right demanding money from Internet usage! Even our critics propose schemes that basically amount to the same!"). What I propose is to fight against all manners of bad legislation. Our alternative proposal should not be "ok, let's do this instead, so you can get some money into the collecting societies so they stop pestering us", but rather "what we need to do is rethink copyright, and seriously limit its scope, so artists can thrive even as collecting societies and music labels crumble". What I am saying is that this kind of proposals to fund artists should wait until there is a clear sign that they are needed. If artists as a group can make a living without such a levy... then why propose it? > I am noticing many criticizms of the freedom-killing laws, but > yet little practical solution being offered. You have a proposal now: good legislation (less copyright) instead of bad legislation (more copyright). Fede From fheinz at vialibre.org.ar Fri Feb 27 19:20:27 2009 From: fheinz at vialibre.org.ar (Federico Heinz) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 16:20:27 -0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: <49A816ED.5060000@mdpi.net> References: <20090225172233.5faf2148@lauren> <20090226184019.0f6b4705@lauren> <49A816ED.5060000@mdpi.net> Message-ID: <20090227162027.0956aed4@lauren> On 27/02/2009, Dr. Francis MUGUET wrote: > Tell this to artists that are barely surviving on unemployement > benefits... So are steel workers around the world. Do you propose to do a Global Steel Patronage mechanism as well? Just like you, I have quite a few artist friends. I even consider myself a small-time amateur artist of sorts, and some people seem to find my works enjoyable. In any case, if you won't call me an artist, I think that I can at least call myself an author without blushing. We all manage to make a living, as good as we can. Some better, some worse. Just like the rest of society, maybe with the exception that information technology has made reaching our audience easier, so actually we're better off than we were before. What makes authors so special that society must enact a special levy so they can live better? Fede From muguet at mdpi.net Fri Feb 27 22:52:15 2009 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 22:52:15 +0100 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: <20090227162027.0956aed4@lauren> References: <20090225172233.5faf2148@lauren> <20090226184019.0f6b4705@lauren> <49A816ED.5060000@mdpi.net> <20090227162027.0956aed4@lauren> Message-ID: <49A8608F.40204@mdpi.net> Dear Federico > > > What makes authors so special that society must enact a special levy so they > can live better? > > Bad comparison. Steel workers have a employement contract and a payroll. Artists do not. Ask artists I have put in c/c one of my arttsts friend. Francis > Fede > > > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA/KNIS http://knis.org 32 Blvd Victor 75739 PARIS cedex FRANCE Phone: (33)1 45 52 60 19 Fax: (33)1 45 52 52 82 muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet PC4D : http://www.pc4d.org World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web Info. Net. Govermance : http://www.wsis-gov.org web NET4D : http://www.net4D.org UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS : http://www.wtis.org REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org ------------------------------------------------------ From muguet at mdpi.net Fri Feb 27 23:07:38 2009 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 23:07:38 +0100 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: <20090227161037.26f0d48c@lauren> References: <49A43594.3040700@mdpi.net> <20090225142146.060cdeb3@lauren> <49A579DA.30809@mdpi.net> <20090225172233.5faf2148@lauren> <49A80D9E.6060503@mdpi.net> <20090227161037.26f0d48c@lauren> Message-ID: <49A8642A.4030703@mdpi.net> Hello Federico > On 27/02/2009, Dr. Francis MUGUET wrote: > >> The ISP are maintaing relatively well their customer account online >> interface >> ( line setting, invoice, etc... ) >> The entry of user choice should be made using the same interface. >> whcih is relatively secure because on the ISP intranet. >> Practical and cheap. >> > > Right now, the ISP's website only offers a few technical option, and tampering > with it has little reward. Most ISP account control panel can be reached only from an ISP adress, and then you control your invoice, you give your banck accout... So far, I have never heard of any exploit of ISP account panel. > But if tampering with the ISPs website was a > potential source of income The invoice and payment system ??? financial info ??? little reward ??? > (for example, distributing a worm that will use the > customer's own computer, username and password to "vote" for a particular > person), then you will realize how little of this sense of security is based on > facts. > The possibility of such a tampering is reduced ( not eliminated ) because we are on the intranet of the ISP. Secondly, the people can check to whom they voted, and if they realized it does not correspond to their wish, they may start a security check and correct for it. If I were to follow your catastrophic approach, then there would not e-commerce at all ! Best Francis > >>> Maybe we should wait >>> >> Wait... wait... until what ? until bad laws get voted... that freedom >> is endangered ? >> > > Of course not. We should fight bad laws. But this proposal won't kill bad > legislation. On the contrary, it may give those who ask for bad legislation some > legitimacy ("See? We are right demanding money from Internet usage! Even our > critics propose schemes that basically amount to the same!"). > > What I propose is to fight against all manners of bad legislation. Our > alternative proposal should not be "ok, let's do this instead, so you can get > some money into the collecting societies so they stop pestering us", but rather > "what we need to do is rethink copyright, and seriously limit its scope, so > artists can thrive even as collecting societies and music labels crumble". > > What I am saying is that this kind of proposals to fund artists should wait > until there is a clear sign that they are needed. If artists as a group can > make a living without such a levy... then why propose it? > > >> I am noticing many criticizms of the freedom-killing laws, but >> yet little practical solution being offered. >> > > You have a proposal now: good legislation (less copyright) instead of bad > legislation (more copyright). > > Fede > > > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA/KNIS http://knis.org 32 Blvd Victor 75739 PARIS cedex FRANCE Phone: (33)1 45 52 60 19 Fax: (33)1 45 52 52 82 muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet PC4D : http://www.pc4d.org World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web Info. Net. Govermance : http://www.wsis-gov.org web NET4D : http://www.net4D.org UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS : http://www.wtis.org REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org ------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/wsis-pct/attachments/20090227/f0f5d309/attachment-0001.htm From rms at gnu.org Sat Feb 28 00:34:06 2009 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard M Stallman) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 18:34:06 -0500 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global patronage - Swiss recycling tax & suggestions In-Reply-To: <49A7C516.3000808@cooperation.net> (message from =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Th=E9o_Bondolfi?= on Fri, 27 Feb 2009 11:48:54 +0100) References: <49A7C516.3000808@cooperation.net> Message-ID: - promoting adoption of "tobin tax" for auctions selling/buying ? The motive of the proposed Tobin Tax on currency trading is to discourage speculation aiming for very small gains from small changes in exchange rates. We don't have a problem of speculation and rapid resale in copies of sharable works, so we don't need anything like this. From rms at gnu.org Sat Feb 28 11:18:16 2009 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard M Stallman) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 05:18:16 -0500 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: <20090227162027.0956aed4@lauren> (message from Federico Heinz on Fri, 27 Feb 2009 16:20:27 -0200) References: <20090227162027.0956aed4@lauren> Message-ID: What makes authors so special that society must enact a special levy so they can live better? Our adversaries claim that authors and artists are special and society owes them special privileges. I reject that claim, which is why I refuse to speak of "compensating" or "remunerating" them as the aim of this plan. However, I think the arts are special, and it is useful to arrange measures to support them better. We don't owe this to the authors and artists, but it will result in more art for us to enjoy. And it may also facilitate winning the freedom to share. From fheinz at vialibre.org.ar Sat Feb 28 18:08:32 2009 From: fheinz at vialibre.org.ar (Federico Heinz) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 15:08:32 -0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: References: <20090227162027.0956aed4@lauren> Message-ID: <20090228150832.00d897cd@lauren> On 28/02/2009, Richard M Stallman wrote: > However, I think the arts are special, and it is useful to arrange > measures to support them better. We don't owe this to the authors and > artists, but it will result in more art for us to enjoy. I think "will" is too strong a word. It may result in more art for us to enjoy. In those terms, this proposal may be useful, and worthy of a broad debate in our societies. But bear in mind that such a levy would also have a recessive result: it will rise the cost of connectivity for everyone, making it even more difficult for countries with a low percentage of people with Internet access to make it more widespread. In any case, I think any such a proposal should not be discussed in the context of stopping legislation to forbid sharing, but rather in discussions on how to promote the arts, because no matter how carefully you word it, people will still perceive it as "giving in", as an acknowledgement that artists are somehow entitled to this money, instead of it being a generous gift from society. > And it may also facilitate winning the freedom to share. I don't think I understand how. Are you thinking that with such a proposal artists will stop pushing for bad laws? The problem is that it's not artists that do so, it's collecting societies, music labels and scuh that are making the fuss. If you don't give the money to *them* (and I agree that we shouldn't) they won't stop their offensive. I am sorry. I see the generosity and the good intention of the proposal, but I'm afraid that any such initiative is likely to backfire on us. Fede From muguet at mdpi.net Sat Feb 28 20:28:55 2009 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 20:28:55 +0100 Subject: [Wsis-pct] What makes authors so special Message-ID: <49A99077.5090800@mdpi.net> Dear Federico c/c Christian Forward of the opinion of an artist to the list Francis --- > > On 27/02/2009, Dr. Francis MUGUET wrote: > > Tell this to artists that are barely surviving on unemployement > > benefits... > > So are steel workers around the world. Do you propose to do a Global Steel > Patronage mechanism as well? > > Just like you, I have quite a few artist friends. I even consider myself a > small-time amateur artist of sorts, and some people seem to find my works > enjoyable. In any case, if you won't call me an artist, I think that I can at > least call myself an author without blushing. We all manage to make a living, as > good as we can. Some better, some worse. Just like the rest of society, maybe > with the exception that information technology has made reaching our audience > easier, so actually we're better off than we were before. > > What makes authors so special that society must enact a special levy so they > can live better? > > Fede > > His main question seems to be "What makes authors so special that society must enact a special levy so they can live better?". On my side, in the actual economical circumstances, I would prefer to ask this question: "What makes bankers so special that society must enact a special levy so they can live better? (after duping so many people)...Everywhere in the world you can find a "special levy" created for the benefit of a special purpose or a special socio-economic group. And sometimes this is rather strange, if not iniquitous. So, we are discussing about Justice and Equality. In the democratic countries, Justice and Equality have been conquest by many social struggles. After the World War 2, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has defined and clarified the main principles/goals of the Civilization/Humanity. Article 1. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Article 17. (1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property. Article 23. (1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment. (2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work. (3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favorable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection. (4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests. Article 27. (1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits. (2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author. Today, for too many artists in the world, these great principles are unfortunately still virtual. I would love to feel to be protected like any other worker and employee, but that's not the case ! I don't want to be "so special" regarding my rights and my capacity to earn money from my own work, but I'm not protected at all ! Why ? Because most of the people think that an intellectual work is not a "real" work; and because it's more easy to steal an idea than to steal a physical thing/product. If you are alone, freelance, independent, as an author or an artist, without big means and a team of art agents, lawyers, etc., if you are not protected by major companies like in music or cinema, it's quasi impossible to defend your own interests. When an artist die, suddenly his/her status becomes more comfortable! His/her works belong to the Cultural Heritage (managed by the beneficiaries - heirs - or by the ?tat), and generally the market and the law protect these works thousand times better than during the life of the artist. You can today, Mr. Federico, steal the manuscript of one of my poems at my home without difficulties and risks, but try to do that when they will be in the French National Library ! I can also precise that if you steal a TV or a computer at my home, you will have more trouble with the police than if you steal a sheet of paper on which is written a poem or the draft of an artwork (if I'm not protected by an institution which ordered this work, as I previously said)... Yes, you're right: the "information technology has made reaching our audience easier". As a digital artist, pioneer in the field of the cybersculpture, I enjoy for many years all the possibilities of the computers, the NC machines, the Internet. I organize international events which would not have been possible without these technologies, I meet people that I would not been able to meet otherwise. But also, in the same time, my concepts, my works, my projects, are quickly diffused around the world, and sometimes without my consent. The laws or the laws projects I know about the protection of the author's rights on the Internet are partial, biased, stupid and inefficient. These laws are not inspired by the thoughts of the artists themselves, but by the big cultural industries, lobbies (mafias) which use the artists' works like "consumer products". Be sure that these industries want a very special law with very special taxes for their own benefit. Francis proposes exactly the opposite with his idea of M?c?nat Global / Global Patronage. We definitively have to think in terms of "globality": 1) because now all kind of disciplines use the same digital tools for producing and for diffusing the creations of the mind (including the physical objects we send via Internet to a 3D printer) 2) because the corporatist solutions are inefficient and inequitable Mr. Federico HEINZ, the authors and the artists doesn't want to live better than the other people in the world, they only want to get the same rights and protections as the other workers ! Regarding the Internet, the M?c?nat Global is the best solution that I know. But, on my opinion, it implies the creation of an international network of independent "copyright collecting agencies". Simply because a lot of artists are not affiliated members of the old traditional copyright collectives. Sometimes they are not accepted by these "clubs", sometimes they don't want to become members, sometimes such copyright collectives don't exist in their country. Christian LAVIGNE. Secr?taire G?n?ral d'ARS MATHEMATICA http://www.intersculpt.org Pr?sident de TOILE METISSE http://www.toile-metisse.org -- From fheinz at vialibre.org.ar Sat Feb 28 22:58:45 2009 From: fheinz at vialibre.org.ar (Federico Heinz) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 19:58:45 -0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] What makes authors so special In-Reply-To: <49A99077.5090800@mdpi.net> References: <49A99077.5090800@mdpi.net> Message-ID: <20090228195845.6da04686@lauren> On 28/02/2009, Dr. Francis MUGUET wrote: > His main question seems to be "What makes authors so special that > society must enact a special levy so they can live better?". On my side, > in the actual economical circumstances, I would prefer to ask this > question: "What makes bankers so special that society must enact a > special levy so they can live better?" Nothing at all. It is a great injustice that they are being treated this way. But adding further injustices will not fix this one. > Mr. Federico HEINZ, the authors and the artists doesn't want to live > better than the other people in the world, they only want to get the > same rights and protections as the other workers ! It looks to me like you are fighting for different rights and protections than other workers. This is to be expected, because the nature of your work is different. But you will have to justify them better than the "property rights over my works" or "use without my consent" mindset you seem to have so ingrained: most of society doesn't seem to be buying that idea, so you'll have to convince us by other means. > a lot of artists are not affiliated members of the old traditional > copyright collectives. Sometimes they are not accepted by these "clubs", > sometimes they don't want to become members, sometimes such copyright > collectives don't exist in their country. And what makes you think that this new international network of collecting agencies will be any better than the previous ones? I am sorry, I still can't find a realistic scenario in which this kind of mechanism can be justified. Fede From fheinz at vialibre.org.ar Sat Feb 28 23:00:06 2009 From: fheinz at vialibre.org.ar (Federico Heinz) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 20:00:06 -0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for supporting the arts In-Reply-To: <49A8608F.40204@mdpi.net> References: <20090225172233.5faf2148@lauren> <20090226184019.0f6b4705@lauren> <49A816ED.5060000@mdpi.net> <20090227162027.0956aed4@lauren> <49A8608F.40204@mdpi.net> Message-ID: <20090228200006.5eba1bb9@lauren> On 27/02/2009, Dr. Francis MUGUET wrote: > Bad comparison. > Steel workers have a employement contract and a payroll. Not when they are out of work, they don't. Fede