[Foundation-l] Clearing up Wikimedia's media licensing policies

Thu Feb 15 07:54:41 UTC 2007

Ray Saintonge wrote:
> luke brandt wrote:
> 
>> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>>  
>>
>>> The first clause in the quotation is remarkable for its ambiguity.  My 
>>> first inclination was to read this as indicating that property is 
>>> essential to the definition of culture, or that a society that does not 
>>> believe in capital does not have a culture.  A more acceptable 
>>> interpretation is that a culture does not exclude the existence of 
>>> property.  In other words
>>>    
>>>
>>>> A free culture is not a culture - without property
>>>>
>>>> A free culture is not - a culture without property
>>>>      
>>>>
>>> Having artists be paid is acceptable in both circumstances.  In 
>>> accounting terms, property is an asset on the balance sheet; getting 
>>> paid belongs in the revenue portion of the financial statements.
>>>    
>>>
>> Hi, and thanks for your thoughts. In clarifying the quote how do you
>> think you should take into account the second sentence - seemingly the
>> counterpoint and twin of the first in the quotation, which is in
>> essence: "A culture without property ... is anarchy, not freedom."  - luke
>>
> One really needs to look at that second sentence in its entirety: "A 
> culture
> without property, or in which creators can't get paid is anarchy, not 
> freedom. ..."
> 
> Does payment imply property?  Is that second premise an explanation or 
> an alternative.  If I really wanted to emphasize grammatically fine 
> points I would suggest that in order to be an explanation a comma would 
> be required after "paid".  I hesitate to cast this into the areana of 
> capitalist (property) versus Marxist (payment) dialectic.  There is a 
> certain idealist thread in Marxism that forsees an anarchic workers' 
> paradise; some doctrinnaire views of libertarianism might get us there 
> too.  That aside, I can see neither the capitalists nor the Marxists 
> promoting anarchy.  Wikinomics is in its infancy, and in that context it 
> is perfectly understandable that Lessig would use the jargon of the 
> society around him. 
> 
> There are a lot of grammatically negative words in the Lessig quote, and 
> I wonder if he would have done better to express things in more positive 
> terms.  Even "free" has a basis in an absence.
> 
> One of the consequences of living in a paradigm shift is the destruction 
> of presumptions.  That curse of interesting times escapes its box, and 
> makes itself felt where it was not expected. 
> 
> The fact is that there are a lot of people providing a lot of 
> intellectual effort for nothing other than the personal satisfaction of 
> doing a good job.  They need to put food on the table as much as anybody 
> else. There is a profound disconnect between work and compensation for 
> that work.  The marketting and manufacturing structures that supported 
> the enterprises that have heretofore been highly profitable are no 
> longer needed, casting aside an army of Willy Lomans.
> 
> Most of us who have an interest in Wikipedia and this mailing list also 
> have an interest in free access to knowledge.  We are highly critical of 
> the notion of intellectual property, particularly copyright.  Property, 
> as we traditionally define, it generates revenue solely on the basis of 
> its own existence.  Is that the kind of property that Lessig considers 
> to be the antidote to anarchy.  In summary I agree with him in relation 
> to creators being paid, but have serious reservations in relation to 
> property.
> 
> Ec
Once again, thanks. For myself, I don't see the absence of that comma
being significant except stylistically. Lessig seems to have quite
deliberately positioned himself four-square in the 'Adam Smith camp' if
it may so be described. Doing so entails consequences for the particular
'freedom' paradigm that the movement espouses, doesn't it? - eg perhaps
our attitude on NC ... that's just one small reason why Lessig's axioms
need examining carefully, in my thinking on this, just as you did :)
Maybe there are other views. Take care - luke