Sorry I hit reply early.
John,The minimum is necessary for survival is not sufficient to achieve optimal scenarios.
On Tuesday, June 28, 2016, John Hendrik Weitzmann <email@example.com> wrote:To the contrary, I think: Wikimedia projects are proof that production of knowledge is not at all necessarily tied to compensation/remuneration. So, as much as I am a fan of levies to compensate for (unhindered and unsurveilled) private reproduction of works in general, I don't see why we should petition in this way.2016-06-23 16:38 GMT+02:00 James Salsman <firstname.lastname@example.org>:The mass consumer copying which allows widespread sharing of knowledge, protographs, performances, written works, etc., also made it more difficult for anyone but the most popular artists supported by the larger consolidated publishers to remain gainfully employed, cutting the total number of people employed as such artists substantially. Wikipedia has unresolved plagiarism issues which are part of the same problem, but the web in general is designed to make and transmit digital copies of things, usually without compensation, so the issue is central to sustainable production of knowledge.
On Thursday, June 23, 2016, L.Gelauff <email@example.com> wrote:At this point I don't see how redistributing copyright income is in scope for Wikimedia. Maybe on a tangent, very remotely? I might be missing something.BestLodewijk2016-06-23 16:27 GMT+02:00 James Salsman <firstname.lastname@example.org>:Lodewijk,What is your opinion of this particular proposal? The Copyright Office said they wanted to study it when I spoke with them yesterday. It seems clear to me. I did the math after looking at employed artist numbers from the Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics, and am convinced it would be near-optimal.
On Thursday, June 23, 2016, L.Gelauff <email@example.com> wrote:Hi James,Given the sensitive nature of the list, and your history in discussions, please don't take 'no comment' for 'no objection'. I stopped objecting to your emails quite a while ago even if I disagree because they are so often far beyond what I consider our shared Wikimedia values, and I suspect I might not be the only one.If you respond, I hope you'll do so as an individual, without suggesting you respond on behalf of anything or anyone. But that is perhaps stating the obvious.Lodewijk2016-06-23 16:15 GMT+02:00 James Salsman <firstname.lastname@example.org>:Since there have been no objections, would anyone like to cosponsor this?
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Copyright Information <email@example.com>
Date: Thursday, June 23, 2016
Subject: RE: General copyright
To: "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>
Cc: Copyright Information <firstname.lastname@example.org>
You may petition the Copyright Royalty Board by mail:
Copyright Royalty Board
PO Box 70977
Washington, DC 20024-0400
U.S. Copyright Office
Attn: Public Information Office
101 Independence Avenue, S.E.
Washington, DC 20559-6000
General Questions Form
Category: General copyright
Name: James Salsman
Question: I would like to petition the Copyright Royalty Judges to institute a sliding scale to redistribute top-40 windfalls from consolidated artists\' publishers to small, developing, and emerging artists in order to support the same number of gainfully employed performing and writing artists prior to the introduction of mass consumer copying technology. What are the email address(es) for petitioning the CRB? Thank you. Sincerely, James Salsman tel.: 650-427-9625 email: email@example.com
Publicpolicy mailing list
Publicpolicy mailing list
--Referent für Politik und RechtLegal and Policy AdvisorWikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 BerlinTel. +49 (0)30 219 158 26-0Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei!Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.