Richard
Stallman (of the Free Software Foundation & GNU fame) spoke
at the University of Calgary this past week. It was great.
He gave an overview some of the history of copyright (including
its original purpose) as well as outlining his position on
copyright. My write-up here a roundup of some points that I found
interesting (not much in the way of a synthesized point).
Free: when speaking about beer
First off, I'll start at the same place that he did: free as in
speech vs. free as in beer. He's talking about free (as in speech)
software.
Free as in speech, refers to the public's right to do something
without being hindered to do so.
Free as in beer, simply refers to the price: as in, you give me
beer without charge.
Despite this explanation, some people at the lecture, still
managed to fuddle the two (as have I also done in my previous post
on copyleft: Copyleft: Why GPL
isn't Free). It's confusing when we are bound by the language
that we speak. Stallman also noted the language problem, wishing we
have 2 words for "free" as they do in latin1. One
= "no cost" and the other = "freedom."
Copyright for the public good
One of his main arguments for copyright reform is that copyright
was brought in to promote progress. That is, if you can be assured
that you can own something you make (& then be the only seller)
you are more likely to make something (I'm simplifying here).
But this suggestions was made in a day when copying was rather
limited: you had to copy by hand. So the public wasn't really
trading in much value - since they weren't going to go out and copy
it themselves. In today's world, particularly with the advent of
computers, copying is trivial. Because of this, the public is
giving up value in not being allowed to copy something.
And his argument is that maybe we aren't promoting progress any
more by having copyright.
Examples: Copy-free and working
The real-world examples of things that weren't copyrighted and
still worked (both those specifically mentioned, and those that
simply came to my mind) is interesting.
He mentioned Radiohead & Nine Inch Nails - both musical
groups with recently albums that were released using non-standard
distribution mechanisms that were more free2.
This issue is particularly interesting to me, as a good friend
is a professional musician: Keith Kitchen. While
bands with large followings have shown new methods of distribution
to be commercially-viable, I wonder if it is possible for small and
upcoming bands.
SaaS = bad
Stallman also took a shot at Software-as-a-Service (things like
Basecamp & Salesforce.com): alleging it
to be worse than non-free software. With SaaS, you don't even get
the source code to run, never mind being able to share it. (Update:
witness all the current uproar about Facebook ToS: http://scobleizer.com/2009/02/17/ownership_facebook/
- it isn't only Stallman that wants control over how software works
to ensure they can use it in the future just as they do in the
present.)
The fun preachy bits
As someone who is trying to persuade people, Stallman makes a
point of using language to his advantage. His choice of words can
be a bit slanted at times (but, of course, his opponents are also
using loaded & slanted words).
- DRM = Digital Restrictions Management
As opposed to the more common "Digital Rights Management"
- Stallman used the "restrictions" which, IMO, is a more accurate
description of such technology.
- "Defective by design"
This is a reference to things that have DRM. They are "defective"
by design. There is also a website: defectivebydesign.org.
And fun stickers that he gave out freely (as in beer).
- "Non-free users are 'subjugated users'."
Notes & Links
- He is referring to the distinction
mentioned here: http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Libre
Unfortunately, my second language is Spanish which also only has 1
word for "free," so a second language in this case, doesn't help
me.
- Nine Inch Nails release their work
under a Creative Commons
non-commercial, share alike license and also had a portion of it as
a free digital download. There also HD videos available via Torrent
download & multi-track downloads for easier remixing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine_Inch_Nails#Ghosts_I.E2.80.93IV_and_The_Slip_.282008.E2.80.93present.29
Radiohead had a digital download that allowed fans to pay whatever
price they saw fit: $0+
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiohead#In_Rainbows_and_independent_work_.282005.E2.80.93present.29
Stallman also specifically mentioned Jane Sibbery. While
previously known as Jane Siberry and now known as Issa, albums are
available at a "pay what 'your gut' says" price via digital
download: http://www.sheeba.ca/store/help.php#sdp
- For more on Richard Stallman's thoughts on copyleft: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/x.html
- Note: I wanted to change the license on the image to CC-PublicDomain
(from my default CC-BY),
alas, that option is not present in Flickr.