A discussion of hybrid open source and proprietary licensing models.

[Sigmascape1 AT cs.com]

Yes, the length of copyright (in the U.S. and abroad) is a horrible injustice 
to culture. In 90 years, how will culture benefit from Windows XP?

It became apparent to me about 5 years ago (because of research I was doing) 
that we have the wrong captain directing our IP ship.

Thank goodness for Creative Commons and it's world-wide acceptance.

MLF


cc-bizcom-request AT lists.ibiblio.org wrote:

>Send Cc-bizcom mailing list submissions to
>    cc-bizcom AT lists.ibiblio.org
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>    http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-bizcom
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>    cc-bizcom-request AT lists.ibiblio.org
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>    cc-bizcom-owner AT lists.ibiblio.org
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of Cc-bizcom digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: RE: Gates' assertions about copyright reform
>      (Marshall W. Van Alstyne)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 17:48:37 -0500
>From: "Marshall W. Van Alstyne" <marshall AT MIT.EDU>
>Subject: Re: [Cc-bizcom] RE: Gates' assertions about copyright reform
>To: Sigmascape1 AT cs.com, cc-bizcom AT lists.ibiblio.org
>Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.0.20050112173536.03307cd0 AT po10.mit.edu>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
>Relative to Gates' missives about IP reformers, the NYT provided some 
>interesting counterpoint based on IBM's move to open up several of its 
>software patents to anyone doing open source development.  While such 
>patents are generally awful to begin with, it's a step in the right 
>direction.
>
>With respect to software, we often forget -- and Gates' seems to overlook 
>-- that copyright was originally only 14 years, renewable only once.  It's 
>been extended not less than 4 times, and never for public benefit.  It is 
>currently absurdly long at author's life + 75 years or 95 yrs in the case 
>of corporations.  These lengths are well past the economically useful life 
>of almost any information good and they clearly do not boost the incentives 
>for creators who have passed away.
>
>Makes one cranky just thinking about it.
>
>see 
>http://publishing.wsu.edu/publishing.wsu.edu_non_ssl/copyright/public_domain_duration/
> 
>for a few historical details.
>
>MVA
>
>At 01:03 PM 1/10/2005, Sigmascape1 AT cs.com wrote:
>>I realize that there has been, and will continue to be, a lot of 
>>discussion on this unfortunate story, but this is how I feel about it, and 
>>why I expect no less from Mr. Gates...
>>
>>Microsoft does not enrich the cultural landscape with its products, and it 
>>never will. Microsoft uses patents and copyrights to make money, and that 
>>is certainly 100% legal. Where I have issue with Gates is his lack of 
>>understanding about what 'giving back' really means. If Gates understood 
>>the U.S. Constitution, he would realize that patents and copyrights are 
>>not perpetual, and that at some point, he and his company will have to 
>>'give back.' By using flexible licensing, many 'give back' on a daily 
>>basis. Sort of meeting copyright law and the public domain halfway.
>>
>>He may also be interested in why someone, anyone, would take some type of 
>>artistic work he or she created (software code, possibly) and wish to 
>>share it with the rest of the world. Basically, he misses the point that 
>>sharing creative works spawns new creative works, and it spawns new ways 
>>to make money. GNU/Linux is one of the great examples of how 'sharing' 
>>actually makes it easier to create and develop new works and products. 
>>Certainly the Creative Commons' licenses do this everyday, and I use them 
>>everyday. I know that my photos and digital art are being sampled, and in 
>>many cases, verbatim copies are being tossed around various P2P networks, 
>>and that's fine with me. I made the decision to 'give back' and I hope 
>>that others will as well.
>>
>>Microsoft could be the most disliked company in the world, I don't know. I 
>>know it has to be in the top 10, and its place is well-deserved. Microsoft 
>>might be able to escape this top ten list if they were willing to engage 
>>the 'communists' they claim are attempting to thwart their business plans. 
>>The day when Gates and the believers in giving back break bread together 
>>will be a great day, and it would take MS off the top ten list.
>>
>>MLF
>>
>> >Message: 1
>> >Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 11:10:55 -0500
>> >From: Marshall Van Alstyne <marshall AT MIT.EDU>
>> >Subject: [Cc-bizcom] Gates & (c) reform
>> >To: cc-bizcom AT lists.ibiblio.org
>> >Message-ID: <6.0.0.22.2.20050110110900.03eee508 AT po10.mit.edu>
>> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>> >
>> >The following is a short & fun article on the Creative Commons response to
>> >Gates' assertions about copyright reform:
>> >
>> >http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,66209,00.html
>> >
>> >Happy new year.
>> >MVA
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >------------------------------
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >Cc-bizcom mailing list
>> >Cc-bizcom AT lists.ibiblio.org
>> >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-bizcom
>> >
>> >
>> >End of Cc-bizcom Digest, Vol 7, Issue 1
>> >***************************************
>> >
>>_______________________________________________
>>Cc-bizcom mailing list
>>Cc-bizcom AT lists.ibiblio.org
>>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-bizcom
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Cc-bizcom mailing list
>Cc-bizcom AT lists.ibiblio.org
>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-bizcom
>
>
>End of Cc-bizcom Digest, Vol 7, Issue 3
>***************************************
>