08. Aug 2008, 11:51 Uhr
|
#30 (Permalink)
|
|
secured.su
Registriert seit: Jul 2008
Beiträge: 431
|
Wieso kann Novell, SuSe, etc. überleben? Es ist nicht illegal ihre Produkte weiterzugeben, man darf sie sogar selbst verkaufen.
und 2.
Wieso kann dann Scientology so gut gegen Kritiker klagen?
Zitat:
7. But why is anonymity necessary?
You cannot have freedom of speech without the option to remain anonymous. Most censorship is retrospective, it is generally much easier to curtail free speech by punishing those who exercise it afterward, rather than preventing them from doing it in the first place. The only way to prevent this is to remain anonymous. It is a common misconception that you cannot trust anonymous information. This is not necessarily true, using digital signatures people can create a secure anonymous pseudonym which, in time, people can learn to trust. Freenet incorporates a mechanism called "subspaces" to facilitate this.
8. And what of copyright?
Of course much of Freenet's publicity has centered around the issue of copyright, and thus I will speak to it briefly. The core problem with copyright is that enforcement of it requires monitoring of communications, and you cannot be guaranteed free speech if someone is monitoring everything you say. This is important, most people fail to see or address this point when debating the issue of copyright, so let me make it clear:
You cannot guarantee freedom of speech and enforce copyright law
It is for this reason that Freenet, a system designed to protect Freedom of Speech, must prevent enforcement of copyright.
9. But how will artists be rewarded for their work without copyright?
Firstly, even if copyright were the only way that artists could be rewarded for their work, then I would contend that freedom is more important than having professional artists (those who claim that we would have no art do not understand creativity: people will always create, it is a compulsion, the only question is whether they can do it for a living).
Secondly, it could be questioned whether copyright is effective even now. The music industry is one of the most vocally opposed to enhancements in communication technology, yet according to many of the artists who should be rewarded by copyright, it is failing to do so. Rather it has allowed middle-men to gain control over the mechanisms of distribution, to the detriment of both artists and the public.
10. Alternatives to Copyright
Fortunately it won't come to this. There are many alternative ways to reward artists. The simplest is voluntary payment. This is an extension of the patronage system which was frequently used to reward artists prior to copyright, where a wealthy person would fund an artist to allow them to create full-time. The Internet permits an interesting extension of this idea, where rather than having just one wealthy patron, you could have hundreds of thousands, contributing small amounts of money over the Internet.
We actually practice what we preach in this regard too, on the 15th of March 2001 the Freenet Project started taking donations, and within a week we had collected over $1000.
11. More sophisticated approaches: Fairshare
Of course some people ridicule this idea on the basis (I assume) that nobody would ever pay for something unless forced to do so (despite significant evidence to the contrary). While I disagree with their rather depressing outlook on humanity, there are more sophisticated mechanisms which do appeal to people's self-interest, such as "Fairshare", where people can buy in to artists much as a venture capitalist will buy into an idea they like, and if that artist is successful they will be rewarded in proportion to their original contribution. This has the nice effect of encouraging people to give more money to obscure artists who they believe have potential. If their investment doesn't pay-off, then they still have the satisfaction that they contributed to an artist whose work they enjoy.
|
The Freenet Project - /philosophy
Und Siran:
Wenn es keine Ausnahmen von Urheberrechten gäbe, könnte man z.B. nicht wissen, was eine Malware so anrichtet, denn ohne die Reverse Engeneering ist es schwerer Malware zu analysieren.
__________________
Studieren ist kein Kavaliersdelikt. Seit dem 01.01.2007 werden Studenten mit bis zu 500 EUR das Semester bestraft.
Studenten sind wie Raubkopierer
"Make Money For Scientology, Make More Money for Scientology, make other people make money for Scientology"
Lehrgrundsatz der Scientology-Org
"Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do." -- Ronald Reagan, 1981
|
|
|