[d@DCC] Creativity and cultural policy (Was: Re: [CPI-UA] Cross
russell at flora.ca
Tue Apr 6 08:34:23 EDT 2004
On Mon, 5 Apr 2004, Wallace J.McLean wrote:
> I had a colleague ask me, last fall, how in the heck did I ever get
> copyright clearance to make use of an 18th-century book. This is where the
> "creators' rights!" rhetoric has brought us. I don't like it.
You may share more views with the protectors of past-creators than I do
I don't consider this to be a case of creators' rights "rhetoric", but a
case of non-creator copyright holders (employers, heirs, etc) lobbying to
be considered a proxy for creators' rights. I also don't like this
rhetoric. As someone who believes the rights of creators are most
threatened by intermediaries including non-creator copyright holders I
believe that recognizing the rights of *living and future* creators (not
their employers or their heirs) is an important part of the solution.
I find the whole discussion about heirs to be interesting. I will
feature some thoughts in my public rely to Susan's next letter. I am
finding that discussing things with Susan is very informative as she is a
very open minded person who is willing to discuss things, but is part of
the previous generation of creativity. I can't claim to "represent"
anyone beyond myself, but I do think I am an example of the new generation
of highly ICT-enabled creators.
In the new culture of creativity the separation between creators and
audiences is getting smaller all the time. My children are far more
likely to want to make money from their own future creativity than to try
to live off of my long-past creativity. I consider extensions of the term
and "strength" of my copyright to be a negative legacy to leave my
children. As a creator I also think of the creativity of other people
beyond my own immediate family and also believe that extensions of my
copyright term harm all of this possible future creativity as well.
The idea that weakening fair dealings and extending the term of
copyright is an example of protecting "creators' rights" is something I
simply do not buy. Those who benefit from such policies are non-creator
copyright holders, not creators.
Now, if we are ever successful in convincing organizations like the
Creators' Rights Alliance that they have been backing the wrong side in
this discussion, we may be able to help bring sane policy balance to
copyright and other cultural policy.
Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
"Make it legal: don't litigate, use creative licensing" campaign.
A modern answer to P2P: http://www.flora.ca/makelegal200403.shtml
Canadian File-sharing Legal Information Network http://www.canfli.org/
For (un)subscription information, posting guidelines and
links to other related sites please see http://www.digital-copyright.ca
More information about the Discuss