[Foundation-l] Kronberg Declaration on the Future of Knowledge Acquisition and Sharing (DRAFT)

[Gwern Branwen]

On  0, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> scribbled:
> Florence Devouard wrote:
>
> >Ray Saintonge wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Florence Devouard wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>You may find below the Declaration I received. Note that it is a draft
> >>>and will probably undergo many many more changes before being somehow
> >>>included in a final official statement. Still, I believe it stands as a
> >>>relevant document, and even though it does not contain all what we wish
> >>>to see, it certainly recognises a great deal of the things which are so
> >>>important to us, as wikimedians.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>It's a very interesting document that at least shows that some people
> >>are paying attention to some of the issues that will be of serious
> >>concern over the next number of years.
> >>
> >>One question that it apparently fails to address is the relationship
> >>between  these developments and intellectual property law.
> >>
> >>
> >Exact.
> >This was also discussed during the session. I believe most participants
> >did not really understand what a free license was. Many participants
> >were part of the private sector, and largely content producers.
> >Protecting the content they had produced was a significant part of their
> >concern.
> >
> They are in a difficult position, and taking a defensive approach as the
> music and movie industries have done does not help their case.  People
> find ways around them.  The Wikipedia experience has show that people
> can be their own content providers.  That model still has some serious
> flaws, but it and a number of other participatory sites show a trend
> toward rejecting mass produced ideas.  The harder the producers work to
> protect their investments, the less people will want them.
>
> I think that many of the content producers are starting to recognize the
> desperation in their position.  Even if the big players are given their
> way over net equality, it's not going to create a bigger demand for
> their product.  It's in the nature of real paradigm shifts that many who
> did very well under the old system are no longer able to function.  They
> can protect their products from legal abuse, but it may be difficult to
> protect it from people not wanting to use it at all.  We know what is
> happening to Britannica.
>
> When I try to imagine the economic models that will apply in what we are
> trying to build the picture becomes very murky.
....

Have to agree with Ray here. While the statement is good in some respects, it's implicitly working in the old economic world with the accompany justifying moral narrative of 'helping artists get fair renumeration/allowing them to exercise their God-given rights/avoid having their work stolen' - omitting changes in marginal costs of distribution and all that jazz (or at least insisting they are purely unconnected brute economic shifts).

--
gwern
Crust e95 DDR&E 3M KEDO iButton R1 erco Toffler FAS RHL K3 Visa/BCC SNT Ceridian
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20070704/692362a7/attachment-0001.pgp>