[Foundation-l] Blogs vs. Wikis

[Samuel Klein]

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007, Gregory Maxwell wrote:

> On 4/14/07, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>> I think Sam's point was rather that it would be sensible for copyleft
>> (and other) licenses to include a provision for earlier expiry of
>> copyright than the default, i.e. life of the author + 70. Instead, it
>> could be something like 14 years. After that period, the license would
>> revert to the most permissive model allowable under the governing
>> legal system (ideally PD). Which I would agree with, but it should be
>> done as part of a concerted effort for copyright reform.

This was my main point, yes.


> Ah, apologies for my misunderstanding but that doesn't change my position.
<
> Already today we see many instances of free works falling out of the
> public domain because access to the public domain copies is lost to
> all except a few who only release modified and encumbered versions.

How does access to public domain copies get lost?  Lots of copies keeps 
stuff safe.  I'm not sure how discouraging people from making further 
copies through license restrictions helps.  Those who would otherwise
make encumbered versions may not make versions at all.  If you have
a specific class of use cases in mind, please elaborate them.


> The "freedom to encumber" works is like the "freedom to punch someone"
> ... They are both 'freedoms' that only exists at the expense of others.

Your comparisons to violence seem inappropriate.
Knowledge and reusability are not rival goods or freedoms.

When you share an idea with me, it is truly freely shared -- I can
do anything at all with the idea.  Who is being punched there?


> We usually don't see people trying to argue for the expansion of other 
> freedoms that only come at the expense of others in the name of 
> "freedom", so I'm not quite sure why we'd see freedom used as an 
> argument for limited duration for copyleft.

The "at the expense of others" train of thought is a bit baffling.
What am I missing?

SJ