The Politics of Media Distribution (Re: Press Action Hero of the Week

On Sun, 8 Feb 2004, dvanhorn wrote:

> Aaron S. Hawley wrote:
> > But I think you may be inferring too much by combining this quote of
> > d'Amyery and his web site's copying policy.  I believe he is exercising
> > the original motives of Copyright law: that which aids authors and their
> > work.  He's not trying to patent anything.
>
> I'm sure I was inferring too much, but this is one of those things I love
> ranting about.

As do I.  My conclusory thoughts on the issue are concerned with whether
the values you, myself and others (on this list) come to feel about the
freedom of computer software, computer documentation,
science/research-related publishing, government information, music, or
legal briefs can be equally applied to the work of those in other fields.
Doing political commentary and research, especially from a (critical)
perspective which consequently receives little recognition or support,
although having universal similarities (concerned with knowledge) offers a
different operating environment, needs and challenges.  In a way, that
there exist a myriad of free licenses for different types of work even
within computing (for documentation, libraries, and software), underlines
this point.

I see d'Aymery's copying policy as more of a way to self-determine the way
the work at Swans is used and presented.  He wishes to have single
postings of work in an uncompromised setting. Although, perhaps this is to
Swans own detriment, given the popularity of "competing" sites like
CounterPunch.  But it seems he's quite aware of this (it seems his policy
is "in spite" of thse other web sits), and is not simply carrying on an
antiquated (and failed) use of copyright with digital media.  It seems
that d'Aymery critically grasps the consequences of how the work at Swans
is distributed and presented and what that consequently says, politically,
about the content.  In a streak similar to what you yourself infer about
the site based on its limits on distribution.  (I also catch a hint that
d'Aymery has technical reasons for having demanding all the site's
original content only be available from swans.com)

In a similar way the GNU GPL is not concerned with complete freedom.
Copyleft attempts to protect a free software programmer's work by making
sure that others must share their work, too. It is in fact concerned with
distrubuting freedom for all users, something that was and is very
controversial even within the free software movement.  Yet, the very
controversial issue of copyleft has been at the crux of the creation of
both viable free software and a free software community.

I say this all in trying not to rhyme with what I imagine were (and are)
the traditionalist arguments made by some of the first proprietary
computer programmers (and more likely software companies) made some
decades ago.  It is actually just that period, a time when programmers and
their trade were pushed into a proprietary model without their being asked
(fairly, anyway), that makes me appreciate the forum Swans offers, and
also become curious of writers and _their_ expectations of their own work:
in availability, distribution and compensation.

D'Aymery was kind enough to respond to both of our first posts.
/a

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Gilles d'Aymery <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 18:11:14 -0800
Subject: Re: [ballistichelmet] Press Action Hero of the Week

Dear Aaron,

Thank you for forwarding this post.

Copyright laws do defend the interests of big corporations and
commercial interests. They also defend the *little guy.* Indeed, you
are using copyright laws when you make *any* demand within the
GNU's FDL.

My use of copyright laws has nothing to do with patenting *ideas* or
*works.*  It has to do with people taking advantage of someone's
else work for the benefit of their own endeavor -- without even
crediting the originator.

Ideas are as free as the morning breeze. Ideas, when they are original
(which most often they are not), should "freely" circulate around the
planet. And people should, and are "free" to build upon them.

People should not, and are not "free" to appropriate them.

Swans, to my recurring lament, does not provide much or any *new*
ideas. It provides, however, original work -- opinions, thoughts, and
yes *ideas,* whether new or not, and whatever the definition of
*ideas* is  -- on a bi-weekly basis, on the Web. Original work means
that it has not been published elsewhere (with the usual exception that
confirms the rule).

It takes immense dedication. I do not say that "nuthing is for sale." I
live it. There is no ads on Swans. There is no money on Swans. There
is not even a request for donations on Swans (get my inference,
here?), and I do not impugn the character of the dissenters.

I just walk my talk.

One is free to use an idea, for any purpose one chooses.

One is not free to appropriate the original idea.

One is free and *should* study and run with an idea.

One should not run and appropriate it.

One should not redistribute original work when the work is available
for all to see. Just point the on-line "neighbors" to the URL.

To improve upon an idea is a sine qua non of progress (moving
forward); but, if intellectual integrity has any reasonance, the
improvement must acknowledge the origin.

I could go on and on and on, and explain how much multi-posting and
self-appropriating is detrimental to Swans' growth and to my work
and to the time I put in, and to the very notion of "change" (something
that your generation is and should be concerned with), and how much
it helps the status quo, the people who actually talk about change but
think about their bank account, or look into their bank account in
order to affect change.

I could. I won't.

And I've not made a dime out of it all. Dimes seem to be a big part of
the contempary experience...

So, please, tell your correspondent (David?) that I salute him, wish
him well, and hope that he will think further and deeper into the future
that he envisions. I can only hope. He will decide. Reality will be the
judge.

In the meantime, I thank you for reading and visiting Swans. Just do
not multi-post! :-)

Yours sincerely,

Gilles d'Aymery
Swans Commentary
_______________________________________________
heads mailing list
[email protected]
http://ballistichelmet.org/mailman/listinfo/heads/
http://ballistichelmet.org/donate/