Cc-europe mailing list

[Wolf Ludwig <wolf.ludwig AT comunica-ch.net>]

Hello,

regarding the long-lasting debate and controversy about the German (or Swiss) 
"Leistungsschutzrechte für Presseverleger" what includes other dimensions 
than the ones mentioned by you, you can have a look at further sources - like 
an older article by myself (who repeatedly published on this) - or at various 
other articles on Heise Online
https://netzpolitik.org/2010/leistungsschutzrechte-oder-neue-biotope-und-reservate-fur-bedrohte-verleger/

For the rest, we can agree not to agree on most of your points.

Best,
Wolf


Gisle Hannemyr wrote Fri, 20 Apr 2012 18:43
>I've just now noticed this blog post by Mike Linksvayer, with
>John Hendrik Weitzmann as support:
>   http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/25560
>
>I know I won't win any friends (or even influence people) by
>saying this here. However, I feel obliged to protest *again*
>against Creative Commons being used to further the interests
>of Google Inc. shareholders.
>
>The contested German law (Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverleger)
>does *not* interfere with the function of CC's licenses and tools,
>or prevent them from being used. So the CC becoming an IGEL supporter,
>is again a blatant violation of CC policy.
>
>We live in times where is becoming more and more obvious that
>technology is separating content and value creation.  Value are
>still being created from content, but remittance flows less and
>less towards the creator.  Instead, it flows towards aggregators
>that don't create any content, but takes content that others
>have created and finds ways of monetizing it.
>
>As a creator, I find this development deeply problematic.  If we
>are going to have independent, quality journalism created by paid
>journalists twenty years from now, instead of just tweets and blogs
>by unpaid amateurs and paid spin-doctors, we need to find some way
>of making some of the value created by content again flow in the
>direction of those that create it.  This means that CC should
>not interfere in this area, but allow the relevant stake-holders
>to experiment with business models and means of regulation that
>further this goal.
>
>As I understand *Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverleger*, it
>proposes that aggregators (i.e. Google) who makes tons of money
>on content created by others shall be required to pay some of that
>money back to the publishers that pays the journalists that
>creates the content.  While I am not convinced that this type
>of statutory license schemes are going to save the Press, I
>also think that this is *not* Creative Commons' fight.  It
>is obviou that such licensing schemes is not in the interest
>og Google - but why do CC *have* to enlist in Google's army
>in these tussles?
>
>I think CC now needs to think seriously about its independence.
>I find it deeply disturbing that CC repeatedly makes advocacy
>efforts on behalf of Google, and at the same time receives
>huge donations from both Google Inc. itself and from key Google
>officers.  Is these advocacy efforts on behalf of Google compatible
>with CC's status as a charity?
>
>I also wonder why Esther Wojcicki, mother-in-law of Google
>co-founder and director Sergey Brin, is on the CC board?
>And why her relationship to Brin/Google is not disclosed, re
>http://creativecommons.org/board ?
>-- 
>- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
>========================================================================
>    "Don't follow leaders // Watch the parkin' meters" - Bob Dylan
>_______________________________________________
>CC-Europe mailing list
>CC-Europe AT lists.ibiblio.org
>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-europe
>
>

EuroDIG Secretariat
http://www.eurodig.org/
mobile +41 79 204 83 87
Skype: Wolf-Ludwig

EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation
http://euralo.org

Profile on LinkedIn
http://ch.linkedin.com/in/wolfludwig