From muguet at mdpi.net Fri Jan 9 01:50:50 2009 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:50:50 +0100 Subject: [Wsis-pct] =?iso-8859-1?q?Bonne_Ann=E9e_/_Happy_New_Year_+_Hydera?= =?iso-8859-1?q?bad_videos?= Message-ID: <49669F6A.1080508@mdpi.net> Bonne ann?e /Image compos?e ? partir de vues de ma rue ? Paris /Picture I made with views from my street in Paris and as a new year gift for you all, the video of the Hyderabad fiesta, plus quite a few serious talks as extra bonus , /et en cadeau pour la nouvelle ann?e pour vous tous, la vid?o de la Fiesta d'Hyderabad, accompagn?e de quelques pr?sentations s?rieuses en bonus ( en Anglais... on en fera d'autres en Fran?ais... )/ -------------------- Videos produced by Francis Muguet ( KNIS) and Barbara Schneider ( Ynternet.org ) /Vid?os produites par Francis Muguet ( KNIS) et Barbara Schneider ( Ynternet.org ) en anglais/ IGF Hyderabad 3 Dec. 2008 Bob Kahn / Handle system presentation IGF Hyderabad 3 Dec. 2008 Bob Kahn / Questions & Answers IGF Hyderabad 3 Dec. 2008 Francis Muguet / Net4D presentation IGF Hyderabad 3 Dec. 2008 Francis Muguet / Net4D Questions & Answers ---------------------------- IGF Hyderabad 4 Dec. 2008 Sophie Le Pallec GS1 IGF Hyderabad 4 Dec. 2008 Tony Vetter, Int. Inst. for Sustainable Development. IGF Hyderabad 4 Dec. 2008 Michael Niebel EU Commission IGF Hyderabad 4 Dec. 2008 Bernard Benhamou, French Ministry for Research IGF Hyderabad 4 Dec. 2008 Workshop 47. The Internet of things Discussion IGF Hyderabad 04 Dec 2008 Wolfgang Kleinwaechter ---------------------------------- *IGF 04 Dec 2008 Gala Party Internet Governance Forum Hyderabad * ---------------------------------- IGF Hyderabad 06 Dec 2008 Bob Kahn IGF Hyderabad 06 Dec 08 Bernard Benhamou IGF Hyderabad 06dec 2008 Francis Muguet "Challenges of the Internet of Things" IGF Hyderabad 06dec08 Internet of Things discussion IGF Hyderabad 06Dec08 Louis Pouzin Workshop "Internet of Things" ------------------------------------- IGF Hyderabad 06dec08 Michel Tchonang "Linguistic Diversity Dynamic Coalition" IGF Hyderabad 06dec08 Linguistic Diversity Coalition Discussion ----------------------------------- IGF Hyderabad 07dec2008 Seiiti Arata IGF YouTube Channel in the context of this last video where the interviewer/producer of the IGF You Tube channel is himself interviewed... ;-) it is interesting to mention videos on the IGF YouTube channel related to people that have been contributing to above listed videos : Barbara Schneider Tatiana Ershova Tchonang Linze Michel Francis Muguet /Quelques vid?os en plus sur le YouTube Channel du FGI.../ -- ------------------------------------------------------ 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/20090109/2311b70c/attachment-0001.htm -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: voeux2009S.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 21291 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/wsis-pct/attachments/20090109/2311b70c/attachment-0001.jpg From muguet at mdpi.net Mon Jan 12 01:44:23 2009 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 01:44:23 +0100 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for content remuneration Message-ID: <496A9267.8060503@mdpi.net> Dear Friends Because of the incoming meeting "Patents, Copyrights and Knowledge Governance: the next four years" ( 12-13 January 2009,Washington, DC, USA ) ( that I cannot attend ) that could influence the policy of the Obama administration, I have at long last translated in English and updated the site presenting a solution that could solve the painful issue of remuneration of content creators without transforming the internet into a feudal state with private police overlords and repression. Please have a look at http://www.globalpatronage.org Please find below the two main pages of the sites for those of you that are reading your mail in a desynchronized way. Your comments are most welcome. May be, the PCT group should consider to support this scheme, because if we do not propose any practical and constrcutive alternative scheme, despite all just criticisms, then we are doomed to endure repression, inquistion, because people do not see any other alternative. All the best Francis -------------------- Global Patronage is a new scheme which could potentially apply to all digital content that is available over the Internet regardless its distribution method (Sites, P2P, Webradios, etc. ..). Regarding Internet users, the Global Patronage features some operational similarities with the Global License , but as far as authors are concerned, the /modus operandi/ is not at all similar. The philosophy and legal mechanisms of the Global Patronage are completely different. At the operational level, internet users pay a mandatory fixed contract sum ( not a tax fee) that is collected by Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and sent to the various copyright collectives or copyright collection societies and performing rights organizations . Unlike the statutory license , compulsory license , as well as the global license , where users are not consulted, users are determining themselves their own *remuneration distribution key *ie way how the collected fixed amount is distributed among content authors. This remuneration key enables its distribution among the various authors of digital content according to users' assessment of the content, not according to use or consumption. The global patronage does not apply only to music but may implemented for all types of digital content. The global patronage does respect the various ways how individuals are making use of Internet. Concerning content creators, authors' identification codes as well as specific codes related to specific content (music, art, etc ...) shall be implemented . These codes already exist for music (ISRC-International Standard Recording Code) , also help to mange the complex distribution of money among various stakeholders such as authors, performers, interpreters, remixer, etc. .... In France, the ISRC national agency is the SCPP , In another area, for example publishing, one may use ISSNs . For blogs, content creators may also use the ISSN ( ISSN for Weblogs ). Content creators should feature their identification codes on websites, and indicate them the metadata of their content (eg ID3v2 tags for MP3 ,).We will not go into gory details in this introduction, the important thing is to underline that these codes do exist and to grasp the main principles of operation. Let us give some practical examples. For music or video, which what is referred most often. Internet users are going to fill up an online form available from his/her ISP account, with references related to content he/she wants to remunerate with a percentage (that should never exceed a set limit, eg. 15%) of the fixed compulsory amount. The Internet user may also refer to an artist, as patron of this specific artist. Concerning media (traditional newspapers, blogs), the Internet user shall indicate either the article reference or the newspaper or blog reference, as a sign of overall appreciation. The ratio between music, video, media and various digital works, must remain completely flexible. For example, there are Internet users that are downloading only music, and do not read any newspaper or blog, and vice versa. This scheme is extremely flexible and should naturally allow for the remuneration of new types of content, such as digital 3D objects. An online portal and search engine should be implemented, facilitating the search for creators and their references. Internet users that have no time to determine and enter their remuneration distribution key may delegate that task to friends, or associations, acting either as permanent or temporary proxies. As for those negligent that did neither express themselves, nor designate a proxy, their ?votes? or remuneration distribution key will be determined by the extrapolated statistics of expressed opinions, that would play, in a way, the role of a large scale poll. The consequences are very beneficial: * 1 / no intrusive ( costly, and nearly impossible..) eavesdropping of Internet data flow that could be detrimental to the privacy and individual freedom, * 2 / emerging creators are not going to be drowned in a statistic that identifies, by design, onmy major creators, and therefore it is extremely positive in terms of artistic and cultural development, and support to creation, national as well as international, while respecting cultural diversity. Because of this scheme, the country that would adopt the Global Patronage could be become a place in the world, where new talents are revealed. As for the global license , but in a more general manner , the Global Patronage avoids the use of DRMs ( Digital Rights Management ou Digital Restriction Management ) Digital Restriction Management) or Trusted Computing aka Treacherous Computing which constitute unacceptable digital handcuffs or shackles. Any way, DRMs have been rejected by the market, and no longer provide a reliable option. At the legal level, limitations and exception to exclusive rights of authors, are intended to deprive an author of his/her rights to prohibit the use of her/his work. Works may be used in this case, without having to ask author's consent. Acceptance of an exception to exclusive rights is regulated by the famous Berne three-step test : /Members ( states) shall confine limitations and exceptions to exclusive rights to certain special cases which do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rights holder /and has been adopted by the European Copyright Directive 2001/29/EC* *and included in various national laws in Europe. The legal mechanism of the Global Patronage does not rely at all on limitations and exception to exclusive rights of authors, as for photocopies or radio, as does the global license that is an intellectual extension. On the contrary, it is clear that broadcast of works through Internet does not constitute a secondary means of dissemination. Our strategy is therefore not to introduce a new exception but rather to manage exclusive rights through public law statutes or laws of public order, introduced in contractual relations that bind respectively on the one hand internet users with their Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and on other hand, content creators through the channel of their various copyright collectives , copyright collection societies and performing rights organizations . Private entities do not have the right to break public law statutes and any attempt to circumvent such laws is void. Many contracts feature public provisions determined by laws or decrees (eg employment, procurement contracts, etc... ). One avoids in this way the famous Berne three-step test. This is legally possible because, in contrast to the radio, one may identify users through their ISP contracts. The situation may be summarized by the quotation of famous inventor Edwin H. Land / : Its not that we need new ///ideas///, but we need to stop having ///old ideas. //The failure of previous digital content remuneration schemes, is that they are not adapted to the new technology, and they are just trying to extend old ideas. DRMs for example are trying in vain to give digital content the same characteristics as consumers' goods, ie that it is not possible to share a good with somebody else without depriving oneself of its usage, that is assimilating digital content with a piece of bread. With digital content, the miracle of /feeding the multitude is possible however !./ At the economic level, the Global Patronage because it provides content creators and businesses, an easy reliable and inexpensive means of payment for all types of digital content, makes it possible to focus on content production. It is expected to save the online Press It makes it possible to draw up business plans that are not based on unlikely financing methods. It will enable the explosion of a new digital economy, much needed right now, in the mist of the serious financial crisis that is shaking the whole world. At the philosophical level, we un-commercialize art, while allowing remuneration of artists, it is a return to the origins, after an excessive industrialization and exploitation of the first industrial revolution. More generally, we un-commercialize creation while allowing financial remuneration for content creation. The Global Patronage sponsorship is therefore neither an item of the consumer's society nor "collectivist solution." Patronage Global is a step towards a society of assessment, which allows a fair and equitable remuneration, while preserving freedom, individuality and cultural diversity, It is a component of the third industrial revolution. ------------------------------------------------- We may summarize the implementation in a few lines: * Operational Scheme o Operational / Internet users : Compulsory payment by each user of a flat fee to his/her ISP.. Each user determines ( remuneration distribution key* )* the distribution of the flat fee among content creators , at his/her assessment. o Operational / Rights owners: Retrieval of payments from copyright collectives or copyright collection societies and performing rights organizations that received the fees collected by the ISPs. * Overall legal general scheme: Legal and regulatory framework for the management of authors' exclusive rights, so we are not dealing with an exception to exclusive rights. o Legal scheme / Internet users : public law statutes or laws of public order included in contracts between users and their ISPs, introducing a relationship with copyright collectives. o Legal scheme / Rights owners: public law statutes or laws of public order included in contracts between users and their copyright collectives. introducing a relationship with a relationship with ISPs. Lets proceed with a more detailed analysis, starting with the legal principles. We underline that it is quite logical that copyright collectives , copyright collection societies and performing rights organizations , because of their goals, participate in the collection of payment for works published on the Internet, and this, in a collective (and in not "collectivist") manner. As a result of public law statutes introduced by the legislator in the contracts between content creators and their copyright collectives , and possibly even in the statutes and bylaws of the copyright collectives association themselves to empower better management, seem quite adequate. These public law statutes shall concern almost all current professional artists (including those represented by the majors). The few creators that have not contracted with copyright collectives shall remain outside the field of the global patronage.. They are unwilling to assign the management of their exclusive rights to a copyright collectives . It's their choice. The legal framework does not force them to abandon from exercising their rights themselves. These creators will remain in the traditional legal frame (forgery etc ...). It can be clearly seen that, because creators have a choice, that our scheme does not amount to an exception, and this legal law point is of paramount importance. Only if they choose a collective solution ( copyright collectives ) then only in those circumstances, they shall be involved in the Global Patronage scheme. For digital content creators (or digital) that are not currently affiliated with a copyright collective . Several cases are to be considered: * There is no copyright collective for that type of digital content, such as blogs. Besides spontaneous creation of specialized copyright collectives, the legislature might have to supports the creation of a "general copyright collective " for all types of digital content. * The creator does not want to join any copyright collective. We do not expect that there would be many such cases, because it would be quite hard and inefficient to collect royalties by herself/himself : o In the prime formulation of the Global Patronage , it is not expected to force a creator to join a copyright collective. , and he / she can manage all its exclusive rights (e) only (e), as he / she wishes. o A second possible approach is to make automatic, by law, for any person not already affiliated with a copyright collective to become member of a general copyright collective. An individual may, however, by a specific decision, may opt out of this general copyright collective. o A third formulation, somewhat bolder , is to make compulsory copyright collective .affiliation. It is a more daring move, since it is not without legal risk. We must really consider in detail whether this mandatory affiliation, combined with public policy statute in contracts, can be likened to a /de jure/ exception. We believe not, but a more thorough legal review is required. -- ------------------------------------------------------ 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/20090112/9f71dc14/attachment-0001.htm From rms at gnu.org Tue Jan 13 11:50:21 2009 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard M Stallman) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 05:50:21 -0500 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for content remuneration In-Reply-To: <496A9267.8060503@mdpi.net> (muguet@mdpi.net) References: <496A9267.8060503@mdpi.net> Message-ID: 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, You have already gone into far more gory detail about identifying each work than is really needed. 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 play in art. Are you thinking about dubbing movies in another language? (that should never exceed a set limit, eg. 15%) of the fixed compulsory amount. What is the motive for this limit? I do not say it is bad, I just don't see the purpose. From rms at gnu.org Tue Jan 13 11:50:14 2009 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard M Stallman) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 05:50:14 -0500 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Global Patronage, a scheme for content remuneration In-Reply-To: <496A9267.8060503@mdpi.net> (muguet@mdpi.net) References: <496A9267.8060503@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. 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. 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? 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.