[Foundation-l] ASCAP comes out against "copyleft"

[Jeffrey Peters]

Dear Liam Wyatt,

Reread my previous emails. I have made it clear that the law that is being
discussed and being promoted by the ASCAP is a law that would terminate the
internet access of repeat piracy offenders. The only reason why CC et al are
involved are through the political advocacy of their creators, most of who
were proponents of the P2P piracy and other actions (as you can see from the
WSJ article by the CC head).

It has nothing to do with the actual CC licenses as only illegal reuses
would be affected.

And "freeculture" is not piracy, just like charity is not theft. Those like
myself produce tons of free content that is intended to be free. We have the
right not to be associated with law breakers and criminals who steal from
those who do not wish their material to be free. Furthermore, since those
like myself are academics in nature, we cannot have our material tainted by
piracy and the rest, as it would undermine any credibility the material has.

That is why Wikipedia et al takes a hardline stance against copyvios.

Sincerely,
Jeffrey Peters
aka Ottava Rima

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 7:55 PM, Liam Wyatt <liamwyatt at gmail.com> wrote:

> Jeffrey,
> You are aware that Wikimedia projects use creative commons licenses, right?
> You have noticed that Wikimedia projects delete content on-sight that is a
> copyright violation? You do know that creative commons is a project to
> promote the *legal* re-use of copyrighted material?
>
>  As the article says:
>
> "While lobby groups EFF and Public Knowledge advocate for liberal copyright
> laws, Creative Commons actually creates licenses to protect content
> creators."
>
> Given that the Wikimedia projects are smack-bang in the middle of the
> free-culture movement, don't you think that you might be barking up the
> wrong tree to suggest that David G is in any way out of place to be
> pointing
> this issue out to us on this list?
>
>
>
> On 25 June 2010 23:39, Jeffrey Peters <17peters at cardinalmail.cua.edu>
> wrote:
>
> > Dear James,
> >
> > If that was what Michael was saying, then I apologize for what I said to
> > him. However, I think the problem could be is that some people see only
> > what
> > wired.com says (i.e. targetting Creative Commons, etc) and not the law
> > that
> > was being passed that the backers of those were in opposition to (i.e.
> the
> > anti-piracy law. As I pointed out in the WSJ article, was something
> > Lawrence
> > Lessig would be against as he wanted, if you read the very end, to end
> any
> > enforcement of copyright laws against P2P people, which happens to be
> > blatant piracy).
> >
> > I am all for my chosing to release my content without any copyright
> > restrictions. I am against forcing everyone to do the same, as there is a
> > lot of content of my own that I do not release freely and I would not
> want
> > to be released freely.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Jeffrey Peters
> > aka Ottava Rima
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>