Re: [ox-en] sense and nonsense of licenses (bare acts/sarai reader 5)
- From: sandor <admin technosandiego.com>
- Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 11:56:01 -0800
Rob Myers wrote:
On 2 Oct 2004, at 09:21, Andrius Kulikauskas wrote:
I'm interested to learn what kind of social and economic arrangements
make the Public Domain work.
They don't. When you place something in the public domain it can be
strip-mined by anyone without credit, payment, or return. See Disney's
use of Public Domain stories to make movies, Microsoft's use of BSD
(effectively Public Domain) code in Windows, and the use of public
domain images in corporate projects by graphic designers.
I define return differently.
My concept of contribution to the commons is heavily influenced by
the notion that use by any other person is a return to at least one
member of society, and of value.
Disney may tell you that their movies are not a part of the commons
- but they are basing this on the consensual illusion of law. What they
have created will influence those that have partaken regardless of what
someone decides to codify.
There is also the question of reduction of value; do any of these
actions somehow take from the value of the original offering? Not in
many cases, leaving the need for any return questionable.
Also you must question your current position - if it is not
completely correct then you do a disservice to the public to lock your
item into a framework based on your current position. Out of
consideration for my own arrogance, and a general belief in the goodness
of the majority - I find creating things with no such limitations a very
The arrangements of the commons are more complex and subtle than an
economic transaction - but they certainly exist.
To speak to the original question - I don't think that it matters :)
With the loss of the legal system there is no concept of 'public
domain' - everything becomes public if it's available. As a legal
construct, the GPL or any other agreement would be of non entity if
there was no legal framework for them to exist within.
The GPL is stronger than PD because you have to provide source.
I think perhaps in the long-term it is not stronger. It is less
flexible - and so, can not evolve.
This is why laws can be amended - it is understood that they will
not be forever relevant.
Organization: projekt oekonux.de