[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
www/philosophy copyright-versus-community-2000....
|
From: |
Yavor Doganov |
|
Subject: |
www/philosophy copyright-versus-community-2000.... |
|
Date: |
Wed, 02 Dec 2009 15:16:57 +0000 |
CVSROOT: /web/www
Module name: www
Changes by: Yavor Doganov <yavor> 09/12/02 15:16:57
Modified files:
philosophy : copyright-versus-community-2000.html
copyright-versus-community.html
Added files:
philosophy/po : copyright-versus-community-2000.fr.po
Log message:
Refill paragraphs. Add back the French translation.
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/copyright-versus-community-2000.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.1&r2=1.2
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/copyright-versus-community.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.11&r2=1.12
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/copyright-versus-community-2000.fr.po?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
Patches:
Index: copyright-versus-community-2000.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/copyright-versus-community-2000.html,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -b -r1.1 -r1.2
--- copyright-versus-community-2000.html 30 Nov 2009 22:44:00 -0000
1.1
+++ copyright-versus-community-2000.html 2 Dec 2009 15:16:39 -0000
1.2
@@ -13,14 +13,16 @@
yavor, Apr 3, 2007 -->
</pre>
-<p><em> Mr Stallman arrives a few minutes after the appointed hour
-of commencement of his talk to address a hushed and respectful
-audience. He speaks with great precision and almost no hesitation in a
+<p><em> Mr Stallman arrives a few minutes after the appointed hour of
+commencement of his talk to address a hushed and respectful audience.
+He speaks with great precision and almost no hesitation in a
pronounced Boston accent.</em></p>
-<p><strong>RMS</strong>: This is made for someone who wears a strangler. </p>
+<p><strong>RMS</strong>: This is made for someone who wears a
+strangler.</p>
-<p><em>[indicates clip-on microphone for lecture theatre amplification
system]</em> </p>
+<p><em>[indicates clip-on microphone for lecture theatre amplification
+system]</em></p>
<p>I don't wear stranglers, so there is no place for it to go.</p>
@@ -28,46 +30,47 @@
<p><strong>Me</strong>: Are you OK with the recording?</p>
-<p><strong>RMS</strong>: Yes! <em>[testy]</em> How many people have to ask
me?</p>
+<p><strong>RMS</strong>: Yes! <em>[testy]</em> How many people have
+to ask me?</p>
-<p>Well, I'm supposed to speak today </p>
+<p>Well, I'm supposed to speak today</p>
<p><em>[long pause]</em></p>
-<p>about copyright versus community. This is too loud. </p>
+<p>about copyright versus community. This is too loud.</p>
-<p><em>[indicates clip-on microphone]</em> </p>
+<p><em>[indicates clip-on microphone]</em></p>
-<p>What can I do? </p>
+<p>What can I do?</p>
-<p>Let's see… there's no volume control… </p>
+<p>Let's see… there's no volume control…</p>
-<p><em>[finds volume control on radio microphone box]</em> </p>
+<p><em>[finds volume control on radio microphone box]</em></p>
<p>this seems better</p>
-<p>OK. Copyright versus community in the age of computer networks. The
-principles of ethics can't change. They are the same for all
+<p>OK. Copyright versus community in the age of computer networks.
+The principles of ethics can't change. They are the same for all
situations, but to apply them to any question or situation you have to
-look at the facts of the situation to compare alternatives, you have to
-see what their consequences are, a change in technology never changes
-the principles of ethics, but a change in technology can alter the
-consequences of the same choices, so it can make a difference for the
-outcome of the question, and that has happened in the area of copyright
-law. We have a situation where changes in technology have affected the
-ethical factors that weigh on decisions about copyright law and change
-the right policy for society. </p>
+look at the facts of the situation to compare alternatives, you have
+to see what their consequences are, a change in technology never
+changes the principles of ethics, but a change in technology can alter
+the consequences of the same choices, so it can make a difference for
+the outcome of the question, and that has happened in the area of
+copyright law. We have a situation where changes in technology have
+affected the ethical factors that weigh on decisions about copyright
+law and change the right policy for society.</p>
<p>Laws that in the past may have been a good idea, now are harmful
-because they are in a different context. But to explain this, I should
-go back to the beginning to the ancient world where books were made by
-writing them out by hand. That was the only way to do it, and anybody
-who could read could also write a copy of a book. To be sure a slave
-who spent all day writing copies could probably do it somewhat better
-than someone who didn't ordinarily do that but it didn't make a
+because they are in a different context. But to explain this, I
+should go back to the beginning to the ancient world where books were
+made by writing them out by hand. That was the only way to do it, and
+anybody who could read could also write a copy of a book. To be sure
+a slave who spent all day writing copies could probably do it somewhat
+better than someone who didn't ordinarily do that but it didn't make a
tremendous difference. Essentially, anyone who could read, could copy
books, about as well as they could be copied in any fashion.</p>
<p>In the ancient world, there wasn't the sharp distinction between
-authorship and copying that there tends to be today. </p>
+authorship and copying that there tends to be today.</p>
<p>There was a continuum. On the one hand you might have somebody,
say, writing a play. Then you might have, on the other extreme, just
@@ -85,27 +88,27 @@
<p>There was a spectrum between writing an original work, and copying.
There were many books that were partly copied, but mixed with original
-writing. I don't believe there was any idea of copyright in the ancient
-world and it would have been rather difficult to enforce one, because
-books could be copied by anyone who could read anywhere, anyone who
-could get some writing materials, and a feather to write with. So, that
-was a rather clear simple situation.</p>
+writing. I don't believe there was any idea of copyright in the
+ancient world and it would have been rather difficult to enforce one,
+because books could be copied by anyone who could read anywhere,
+anyone who could get some writing materials, and a feather to write
+with. So, that was a rather clear simple situation.</p>
<p>Later on, printing was developed and printing changed the situation
-greatly. It provided a much more efficient way to make copies of books,
-provided that they were all identical. And it required specialised,
-fairly expensive equipment that an ordinary reader would not have. So
-in effect it created a situation in which copies could only feasibly be
-made by specialised businesses, of which the number was not that large.
-There might have been hundreds of printing presses in a country and
-hundreds of thousands, or maybe even millions of actually people who
-could read. So the decrease in the number of places in which copies
-could be made was tremendous.</p>
-
-<p>Now the idea of copyright developed along with the printing
-press. I think that there may be… I think I remember reading
-that Venice, which was a major centre of printing in the 1500s also
-had a kind of copyright but I can't find that: I couldn't find that
+greatly. It provided a much more efficient way to make copies of
+books, provided that they were all identical. And it required
+specialised, fairly expensive equipment that an ordinary reader would
+not have. So in effect it created a situation in which copies could
+only feasibly be made by specialised businesses, of which the number
+was not that large. There might have been hundreds of printing
+presses in a country and hundreds of thousands, or maybe even millions
+of actually people who could read. So the decrease in the number of
+places in which copies could be made was tremendous.</p>
+
+<p>Now the idea of copyright developed along with the printing press.
+I think that there may be… I think I remember reading that
+Venice, which was a major centre of printing in the 1500s also had a
+kind of copyright but I can't find that: I couldn't find that
reference again. But the system of copyright fitted in naturally with
the printing press because it became rare for ordinary readers to make
copies. It still happen. People who were very poor or very rich had
@@ -133,48 +136,48 @@
price, so that small extra addition to the price was a very small
burden for the readers. The actions restricted by copyright were
actions that you couldn't do, as an ordinary reader, and therefore, it
-didn't cause a problem. And because of this there was no need for harsh
-punishments to convince readers to tolerate it and to obey.</p>
+didn't cause a problem. And because of this there was no need for
+harsh punishments to convince readers to tolerate it and to obey.</p>
-<p>So copyright effectively was an industrial regulation. It restricted
-publishers and writers but it didn't restrict the general public. It
-was somewhat like charging a fee for going on a boat ride across the
-Atlantic. You know, it's easy to collect the fee when people are
-getting on a boat for weeks or months. </p>
-
-<p>Well, as time went on, printing got more efficient. Eventually even
-poor people didn't have to bother copying books by hand and the idea
-sort of got forgotten. I think it's in the 1800s that essentially
-printing got cheap enough so that essentially everyone could afford
-printed books, so to some extent the idea of poor people copying books
-by hand was lost from memory. I heard about this about ten years ago
-when I started talking about the subject to people.</p>
+<p>So copyright effectively was an industrial regulation. It
+restricted publishers and writers but it didn't restrict the general
+public. It was somewhat like charging a fee for going on a boat ride
+across the Atlantic. You know, it's easy to collect the fee when
+people are getting on a boat for weeks or months.</p>
+
+<p>Well, as time went on, printing got more efficient. Eventually
+even poor people didn't have to bother copying books by hand and the
+idea sort of got forgotten. I think it's in the 1800s that
+essentially printing got cheap enough so that essentially everyone
+could afford printed books, so to some extent the idea of poor people
+copying books by hand was lost from memory. I heard about this about
+ten years ago when I started talking about the subject to people.</p>
<p>So originally in England copyright was partly intended as a measure
-of censorship. People who wanted to publish books were required to get
-approval from the government but the idea began to change and it a
+of censorship. People who wanted to publish books were required to
+get approval from the government but the idea began to change and it a
different idea was expressed explicitly in the US constitution. When
the US constitution was written there was a proposal that authors
-should be entitled to a monopoly on copying their books. This idea was
-rejected. Instead, a different idea of the philosophy of copyright was
-put into the constitution. The idea that a copyright system could
-be… well, the idea is that people have the natural right to
-copy things but copyright as an artificial restriction on copying can
-be authorised for the sake of promoting progress.</p>
+should be entitled to a monopoly on copying their books. This idea
+was rejected. Instead, a different idea of the philosophy of
+copyright was put into the constitution. The idea that a copyright
+system could be… well, the idea is that people have the natural
+right to copy things but copyright as an artificial restriction on
+copying can be authorised for the sake of promoting progress.</p>
<p>So the system of copyright would have been the same more or less
either way, but this was a statement about the purpose which is said
-to justify copyright. It is explicitly justified as a means to promote
-progress, not as an entitlement for copyright owners. So the system is
-meant to modify the behaviour of copyright owners so as to benefit the
-public. The benefit consists of more books being written and published
-and this is intended to contribute to the progress of civilisation, to
-spreading ideas, and as a means to this end… in other words as
-a means to this end copyright exists. So this also thought of as a
-bargain between the public and authors; that the public gives up its
-natural right to make copies of anything in exchange for the progress
-that is brought about indirectly, by encouraging more people to
-write. </p>
+to justify copyright. It is explicitly justified as a means to
+promote progress, not as an entitlement for copyright owners. So the
+system is meant to modify the behaviour of copyright owners so as to
+benefit the public. The benefit consists of more books being written
+and published and this is intended to contribute to the progress of
+civilisation, to spreading ideas, and as a means to this end…
+in other words as a means to this end copyright exists. So this also
+thought of as a bargain between the public and authors; that the
+public gives up its natural right to make copies of anything in
+exchange for the progress that is brought about indirectly, by
+encouraging more people to write.</p>
<p>Now it may seem like an obscure question to ask “What's the
purpose of copyright?” But the purpose of any activity is the
@@ -185,11 +188,11 @@
misrepresent it and sweep it under the rug. There has been a campaign
for decades to try to spread the idea that was rejected in the US
constitution. The idea that copyright exists as an entitlement for
-copyright owners. And you can that expressed in almost everything they
-say about it starting and ending with the word “pirate”
-which is used to give the impression that making an unauthorised copy
-is the moral equivalent of attacking a ship and kidnapping or killing
-the people on board.</p>
+copyright owners. And you can that expressed in almost everything
+they say about it starting and ending with the word
+“pirate” which is used to give the impression that making
+an unauthorised copy is the moral equivalent of attacking a ship and
+kidnapping or killing the people on board.</p>
<p>So if you look at the statements being made by publishers you find
lots of implicit assumptions of this sort which you have to drag into
@@ -199,26 +202,27 @@
<p><em>[brightens]</em></p>
<p>Anyway, as long as the age of the printing press continued,
-copyright was painless, easy to enforce, and probably a good idea. But
-the age of the printing press began changing a few decades ago when
-things like Xerox machines and tape recorders started to be available,
-and more recently as computer networks have come into use the situation
-has changed drastically. We are now in a situation technologically more
-like the ancient world, where anybody who could read something could
-also make a copy of it that was essentially as good as the best copies
-anyone could make.</p>
+copyright was painless, easy to enforce, and probably a good idea.
+But the age of the printing press began changing a few decades ago
+when things like Xerox machines and tape recorders started to be
+available, and more recently as computer networks have come into use
+the situation has changed drastically. We are now in a situation
+technologically more like the ancient world, where anybody who could
+read something could also make a copy of it that was essentially as
+good as the best copies anyone could make.</p>
<p><em>[murmuring in the audience]</em></p>
<p>A situation now where once again, ordinary readers can make copies
themselves. It doesn't have to be done through centralised mass
production, as in the printing press. Now this change in technology
-changes the situation in which copyright law operates. The idea of the
-bargain was that the public trades away its natural right to make
-copies, and in exchange gets a benefit. Well, a bargain could be a good
-one or a bad one. It depends on the worth of what you are giving up.
-And the worth of what you are getting. In the age of the printing press
-the public traded away a freedom that it was unable to use.</p>
+changes the situation in which copyright law operates. The idea of
+the bargain was that the public trades away its natural right to make
+copies, and in exchange gets a benefit. Well, a bargain could be a
+good one or a bad one. It depends on the worth of what you are giving
+up. And the worth of what you are getting. In the age of the
+printing press the public traded away a freedom that it was unable to
+use.</p>
<p>It's like finding a way of selling shit: what have you got to lose?
You've got it on hand anyway, if you get something for it, it can
@@ -249,80 +253,83 @@
bargain, and you probably want to sell less of what you sold in the
past.</p>
-<p>But the publishers are trying to do exactly the opposite. At exactly
-the time when the public's interest is to keep part of the freedom to
-use it, the publishers are passing laws which make us give up more
-freedom. You see copyright was never intended to be an absolute
-monopoly on all the uses of a copyright work. It covered some uses and
-not others, but in recent times the publishers have been pushing to
-extend it further and further. Ending up most recently with things like
-the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in the US which they are also
-trying to turn into a treaty through the World Intellectual Property
-Organisation which is essentially an organisation representing the
-owners of copyrights and patents and which works to try to increase
-their power, and pretends to be doing so in the name of humanity rather
-than in the name of these particular companies.</p>
+<p>But the publishers are trying to do exactly the opposite. At
+exactly the time when the public's interest is to keep part of the
+freedom to use it, the publishers are passing laws which make us give
+up more freedom. You see copyright was never intended to be an
+absolute monopoly on all the uses of a copyright work. It covered
+some uses and not others, but in recent times the publishers have been
+pushing to extend it further and further. Ending up most recently
+with things like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in the US which
+they are also trying to turn into a treaty through the World
+Intellectual Property Organisation which is essentially an
+organisation representing the owners of copyrights and patents and
+which works to try to increase their power, and pretends to be doing
+so in the name of humanity rather than in the name of these particular
+companies.</p>
<p>Now, what are the consequences when copyright starts restricting
activities that ordinary readers can do. Well, for one thing it's no
longer an industrial regulation. It becomes an imposition on the
-public. For another, because of this, you find the public's starting to
-object to it You know, when it is stopping ordinary people from doing
-things that are natural in their lives you find ordinary people
+public. For another, because of this, you find the public's starting
+to object to it You know, when it is stopping ordinary people from
+doing things that are natural in their lives you find ordinary people
refusing to obey. Which means that copyright is no longer easy to
enforce and that's why you see harsher and harsher punishments being
-adopted by governments that are basically serving the publishers rather
-than the public. </p>
+adopted by governments that are basically serving the publishers
+rather than the public.</p>
<p>Also, you have to question whether a copyright system is still
beneficial. Basically, the thing that we have been paying is now
valuable for us. Maybe the deal is a bad deal now. So all the things
that made technology fit in well with the technology of the printing
press make it fit badly with digital information technology. So,
-instead of like, charging the fee to cross the Atlantic in a boat, it's
-like charging a fee to cross a street. It's a big nuisance, because
-people cross the street all along the street, and making them pay is a
-pain in the neck.</p>
+instead of like, charging the fee to cross the Atlantic in a boat,
+it's like charging a fee to cross a street. It's a big nuisance,
+because people cross the street all along the street, and making them
+pay is a pain in the neck.</p>
<h3>New kinds of copyright</h3>
<p>Now what are some of the changes we might want to make in copyright
law in order to adapt it to the situation that the public finds itself
-in? Well the extreme change might be to abolish copyright law but that
-isn't the only possible choice. There are various situations in which
-we could reduce the power of copyright without abolishing it entirely
-because there are various different actions that can be done with a
-copyright and there are various situations in which you might do them,
-and each of those is an independent question. Should copyright cover
-this or not? In addition, there is a question of “How
-long?”. Copyright used to be much shorter in its period or
-duration, and it's been extended over and over again in the past fifty
-years or so and in fact in now appears that the owners of copyrights
-are planning to keep on extending copyrights so that they will never
-expire again. The US constitution says that “copyright must
-exist for a limited time” but the publishers have found a way
-around this: every twenty years they make copyright twenty years
-longer, and this way, no copyright will ever expire again. Now a
-thousand years from now, copyright might last for 1200 years, just
-basically enough so that copyright on Mickey Mouse can not expire.</p>
+in? Well the extreme change might be to abolish copyright law but
+that isn't the only possible choice. There are various situations in
+which we could reduce the power of copyright without abolishing it
+entirely because there are various different actions that can be done
+with a copyright and there are various situations in which you might
+do them, and each of those is an independent question. Should
+copyright cover this or not? In addition, there is a question of
+“How long?”. Copyright used to be much shorter in its
+period or duration, and it's been extended over and over again in the
+past fifty years or so and in fact in now appears that the owners of
+copyrights are planning to keep on extending copyrights so that they
+will never expire again. The US constitution says that
+“copyright must exist for a limited time” but the
+publishers have found a way around this: every twenty years they make
+copyright twenty years longer, and this way, no copyright will ever
+expire again. Now a thousand years from now, copyright might last for
+1200 years, just basically enough so that copyright on Mickey Mouse
+can not expire.</p>
<p>Because that's why, people believe that US Congress passed a law to
extend copyright for twenty years. Disney was paying them, and paying
the President too, with campaign funds of course, to make it lawful.
See, if they just gave them cash it would be a crime, but contributing
indirectly to campaigns is legal and that's what they do: to buy the
-legislators. So they passed the Sunny Bono copyright act. Now this is
-interesting: Sunny Bono was a congressman and a member of the Church of
-Scientology, which uses copyrights to suppress knowledge of its
-activities. So they have their pet congressman and they pushed very
-hard for increased copyright powers.</p>
+legislators. So they passed the Sunny Bono copyright act. Now this
+is interesting: Sunny Bono was a congressman and a member of the
+Church of Scientology, which uses copyrights to suppress knowledge of
+its activities. So they have their pet congressman and they pushed
+very hard for increased copyright powers.</p>
<p>Anyway, we were fortunate that Sunny Bono died but in his name they
passed the Mickey Mouse Copyright Act of 1998 I believe. It's being
challenged by the way, on the grounds that, there is a legal case that
people hope to go to the Supreme Court and have the extension of old
copyrights tossed out. In any case, there are all these different
-situations and questions where we could reduce the scope of copyright.</p>
+situations and questions where we could reduce the scope of
+copyright.</p>
<p>So what are some of them? Well, first of all there are various
different contexts for copying. There is commercial sale of copies in
@@ -333,91 +340,93 @@
organisation, and some of these things could be done either
commercially or non-commercially. You know, you could imagine a
company handing out copies to its staff or you could imagine a school
-doing it, or some private, non-profit organisation doing it. Different
-situations, and we don't have to treat them all the same. So one way
-in we could reclaim the… in general though, the activities that
-are the most private are those that are most crucial to our freedom
-and our way of life, whereas the most public and commercial are those
-that are most useful for providing some sort of income for authors so
-it's a natural situation for a compromise in which the limits of
-copyright are put somewhere in the middle so that a substantial part
-of the activity still is covered and provides an income for authors,
-while the activities that are most directly relevant to peoples'
-private lives become free again. And this is the sort of thing that I
-propose doing with copyright for things such as novels and biographies
-and memoires and essays and so on. That at the very minimum, people
-should always have a right to share a copy with a friend. It's when
-governments have to prevent that kind of activity that they have to
-start intruding into everyone's lives and using harsh punishments. The
-only way basically to stop people in their private lives from sharing
-is with a police state, but public commercial activities can be
-regulated much more easily and much more painlessly. </p>
+doing it, or some private, non-profit organisation doing it.
+Different situations, and we don't have to treat them all the same.
+So one way in we could reclaim the… in general though, the
+activities that are the most private are those that are most crucial
+to our freedom and our way of life, whereas the most public and
+commercial are those that are most useful for providing some sort of
+income for authors so it's a natural situation for a compromise in
+which the limits of copyright are put somewhere in the middle so that
+a substantial part of the activity still is covered and provides an
+income for authors, while the activities that are most directly
+relevant to peoples' private lives become free again. And this is the
+sort of thing that I propose doing with copyright for things such as
+novels and biographies and memoires and essays and so on. That at the
+very minimum, people should always have a right to share a copy with a
+friend. It's when governments have to prevent that kind of activity
+that they have to start intruding into everyone's lives and using
+harsh punishments. The only way basically to stop people in their
+private lives from sharing is with a police state, but public
+commercial activities can be regulated much more easily and much more
+painlessly.</p>
<p>Now, where we should draw these lines depends, I believe, on the
-kind of work. Different works serve different purposes for their users.
-Until today we've had a copyright system that treats almost everything
-exactly alike except for music: there are a lot of legal exceptions for
-music. But there's no reason why we have to elevate simplicity above
-the practical consequences. We can treat different kinds of works
-differently. I propose a classification broadly into three kinds of
-works: functional works, works that express personal position, and
-works that are fundamentally aesthetic.</p>
+kind of work. Different works serve different purposes for their
+users. Until today we've had a copyright system that treats almost
+everything exactly alike except for music: there are a lot of legal
+exceptions for music. But there's no reason why we have to elevate
+simplicity above the practical consequences. We can treat different
+kinds of works differently. I propose a classification broadly into
+three kinds of works: functional works, works that express personal
+position, and works that are fundamentally aesthetic.</p>
<p>Functional works include: computer software; recipes; textbooks;
dictionaries and other reference works; anything that you use to get
jobs done. For functional works I believe that people need very broad
freedom, including the freedom to publish modified versions. So
everything I am going to say tomorrow about computer software applies
-to other kinds of functional works in the same way. So, this criterion
-of free… because it necessary to have the freedom to publish a
-modified version this means we have to almost completely get rid of
-copyright but the free software movement is showing that the progress
-that society wants that is supposedly the justification for society
-having copyright can happen in other ways. We don't have to give up
-these important freedoms to have progress. Now the publishers are
-always asking us to presuppose that their there is no way to get
+to other kinds of functional works in the same way. So, this
+criterion of free… because it necessary to have the freedom to
+publish a modified version this means we have to almost completely get
+rid of copyright but the free software movement is showing that the
+progress that society wants that is supposedly the justification for
+society having copyright can happen in other ways. We don't have to
+give up these important freedoms to have progress. Now the publishers
+are always asking us to presuppose that their there is no way to get
progress without giving up our crucial freedoms and the most important
thing I think about the free software movement is to show them that
their pre-supposition is unjustified.</p>
<p>I can't say I'm sure that in all of these areas we can't produce
-progress without copyright restrictions stopping people, but what we've
-shown is that we've got a chance: it's not a ridiculous idea. It
-shouldn't be dismissed. The public should not suppose that the only way
-to get progress is to have copyright but even for these kinds of works
-there can be some kinds of compromise copyright systems that are
-consistent with giving people the freedom to publish modified versions.
-Look, for example, at the GNU free documentation license, which is used
-to make a book free. It allows anyone to make and sell copies of a
-modified version, but it requires giving credit in certain ways to the
-original authors and publishers in a way that can give them a
-commercial advantage and thus I believe make it possible to have
-commercial publishing of free textbooks, and if this works people are
-just beginning to try it commercially. The Free Software Foundation
-has been selling lots of copies of various free books for almost
-fifteen years now and it's been successful for us. At this point
-though, commercial publishers are just beginning to try this particular
-approach, but I think that even for functional works where the freedom
-to publish modified works is essential, some kind of compromise
-copyright system can be worked out, which permits everyone that
-freedom. </p>
+progress without copyright restrictions stopping people, but what
+we've shown is that we've got a chance: it's not a ridiculous idea.
+It shouldn't be dismissed. The public should not suppose that the
+only way to get progress is to have copyright but even for these kinds
+of works there can be some kinds of compromise copyright systems that
+are consistent with giving people the freedom to publish modified
+versions. Look, for example, at the GNU free documentation license,
+which is used to make a book free. It allows anyone to make and sell
+copies of a modified version, but it requires giving credit in certain
+ways to the original authors and publishers in a way that can give
+them a commercial advantage and thus I believe make it possible to
+have commercial publishing of free textbooks, and if this works people
+are just beginning to try it commercially. The Free Software
+Foundation has been selling lots of copies of various free books for
+almost fifteen years now and it's been successful for us. At this
+point though, commercial publishers are just beginning to try this
+particular approach, but I think that even for functional works where
+the freedom to publish modified works is essential, some kind of
+compromise copyright system can be worked out, which permits everyone
+that freedom.</p>
<p>For other kinds of works, the ethical questions apply differently,
-because the works are used differently. The second category of works is
-works that express someone's positions or views or experiences. For
-example, essays, offers to do business with people, statements of one's
-legal position, memoirs, anything that says, whose point is to say what
-you think or you want or what you like. Book reviews and restaurant
-reviews are also in this category: it's expressing a personal opinion
-or position. Now for these kinds of works, making a modified version is
-not a useful thing to do. So I see no reason why people should need to
-have the freedom to publish modified versions of these works. Verbatim
-copying is the only thing that people need to have the freedom to do
-and because of this we can consider the idea that the freedom to
-distribute copies should only apply in some situations, for example if
-it were limited to non-commercial distribution that would be OK I
-think. Ordinary citizen's lives would no longer be restricted but
-publishers would still be covered by copyright for these things.</p>
+because the works are used differently. The second category of works
+is works that express someone's positions or views or experiences.
+For example, essays, offers to do business with people, statements of
+one's legal position, memoirs, anything that says, whose point is to
+say what you think or you want or what you like. Book reviews and
+restaurant reviews are also in this category: it's expressing a
+personal opinion or position. Now for these kinds of works, making a
+modified version is not a useful thing to do. So I see no reason why
+people should need to have the freedom to publish modified versions of
+these works. Verbatim copying is the only thing that people need to
+have the freedom to do and because of this we can consider the idea
+that the freedom to distribute copies should only apply in some
+situations, for example if it were limited to non-commercial
+distribution that would be OK I think. Ordinary citizen's lives would
+no longer be restricted but publishers would still be covered by
+copyright for these things.</p>
<p><em>[drinks water]</em></p>
@@ -425,8 +434,8 @@
people to privately redistribute copies occasionally. I used to think
that maybe it would be OK if all public redistribution were still
restricted by copyright for these works but the experience with
-Napster has convinced me that that's not so. And the reason is that it
-shows that lots and lots of people both want to publicly
+Napster has convinced me that that's not so. And the reason is that
+it shows that lots and lots of people both want to publicly
redistribute—publicly but not commercially
redistribute—and it's very useful. And if it's so useful, then
it's wrong to stop people from doing it. But it would still be
@@ -440,31 +449,33 @@
a good thing to do: it's falsifying the record so they should only be
distributed verbatim, so scientific papers should be freely
redistributable by anyone because we should be encouraging their
-redistribution, and I hope you will never agree to publish a scientific
-paper in a way that restricts verbatim redistribution on the net. Tell
-the journal that you won't do that.</p>
+redistribution, and I hope you will never agree to publish a
+scientific paper in a way that restricts verbatim redistribution on
+the net. Tell the journal that you won't do that.</p>
<p>Because scientific journals have become an obstacle to the
dissemination of scientific results. They used to be a necessary
-mechanism. Now they are nothing but an obstruction, and those journals
-that restrict access and restrict redistribution <em>[emphasis]</em> must be
-abolished. They are the enemies of the dissemination of knowledge; they
-are the enemies of science, and this practice must come to an end.</p>
+mechanism. Now they are nothing but an obstruction, and those
+journals that restrict access and restrict
+redistribution <em>[emphasis]</em> must be abolished. They are the
+enemies of the dissemination of knowledge; they are the enemies of
+science, and this practice must come to an end.</p>
<p>Now there is a third category of works, which is aesthetic works,
whose main use is to be appreciated; novels, plays, poems, drawings in
many cases, typically and most music. Typically it's made to be
-appreciated. Now, they're not functional people don't have the need to
-modify and improve them, the way people have the need to do that with
-functional works. So it's a difficult question: is it vital for people
-to have the freedom to publish modified versions of an aesthetic work.
-On the one hand you have authors with a lot of ego attachment saying </p>
+appreciated. Now, they're not functional people don't have the need
+to modify and improve them, the way people have the need to do that
+with functional works. So it's a difficult question: is it vital for
+people to have the freedom to publish modified versions of an
+aesthetic work. On the one hand you have authors with a lot of ego
+attachment saying</p>
-<p><em>[English accent, dramatic gesture]</em> </p>
+<p><em>[English accent, dramatic gesture]</em></p>
<p>“Oh this is my creation.”</p>
-<p><em>[Back to Boston]</em> </p>
+<p><em>[Back to Boston]</em></p>
<p>“How dare anyone change a line of this?” On the other
hand you have the folk process which shows that a series of people
@@ -490,14 +501,14 @@
<p>You'll hear people ridiculing this idea in exactly those terms.
Well, I am not sure what we should do about publishing modified
versions of these aesthetic works. One possibility is to do something
-like what is done in music, which is anyone's allowed to rearranged and
-play a piece of music, but they may have to pay for doing so, but they
-don't have to ask permission to perform it. Perhaps for commercial
-publication of these works, either modified or unmodified, if they're
-making money they might have to pay some money, that's one possibility.
-It's a difficult question what to do about publishing modified versions
-of these aesthetic works and I don't have an answer that I'm fully
-satisfied with.</p>
+like what is done in music, which is anyone's allowed to rearranged
+and play a piece of music, but they may have to pay for doing so, but
+they don't have to ask permission to perform it. Perhaps for
+commercial publication of these works, either modified or unmodified,
+if they're making money they might have to pay some money, that's one
+possibility. It's a difficult question what to do about publishing
+modified versions of these aesthetic works and I don't have an answer
+that I'm fully satisfied with.</p>
<p><strong>Audience member 1 (AM1)</strong>, question, inaudible</p>
@@ -505,7 +516,7 @@
so fast you couldn't possibly have understood it. He said “What
kind of category should computer games go in?” Well, I would say
that the game engine is functional and the game scenario is
-aesthetic. </p>
+aesthetic.</p>
<p><strong>AM1</strong>: Graphics?</p>
@@ -520,20 +531,20 @@
<h3>Copyright: possible solutions</h3>
-<p>Now, how long should copyright last? Well, nowadays the tendency in
-publishing is for books to go out of copyright faster and faster. Today
-in the US most books that are published are out of print within three
-years. They've been remaindered and they're gone. So it's clear that
-there's not real need for copyright to last for say 95 years: it's
-ridiculous. In fact, it's clear that ten year copyright would be
-sufficient to keep the activity of publishing going. But it should be
-ten years from date of publication, but it would make sense to allow an
-additional period before publication which could even be longer than
-ten years which as you see, as long as the book has not been published
-the copyright on it is not restricting the public. It's basically just
-giving the author to have it published eventually but I think that once
-the book is published copyright should run for some ten years or so,
-then that's it.</p>
+<p>Now, how long should copyright last? Well, nowadays the tendency
+in publishing is for books to go out of copyright faster and faster.
+Today in the US most books that are published are out of print within
+three years. They've been remaindered and they're gone. So it's
+clear that there's not real need for copyright to last for say 95
+years: it's ridiculous. In fact, it's clear that ten year copyright
+would be sufficient to keep the activity of publishing going. But it
+should be ten years from date of publication, but it would make sense
+to allow an additional period before publication which could even be
+longer than ten years which as you see, as long as the book has not
+been published the copyright on it is not restricting the public.
+It's basically just giving the author to have it published eventually
+but I think that once the book is published copyright should run for
+some ten years or so, then that's it.</p>
<p>Now, I once proposed this in a panel where the other people were
all writers. And one of them said: “Ten year copyright? Why
@@ -550,36 +561,36 @@
always demanding more power in the name of the authors and they will
bring along a few very famous very successful writers who have so much
clout that they can get contracts that treat them very well to testify
-saying that the power is really for their sake. Meanwhile most writers
-who are not famous and are not rich and have no particular clout are
-being treated horribly by the publishing industry, and it's even worse
-in music. I recommend all of you to read Courtney Love's article: it's
-in Salon magazine right? </p>
+saying that the power is really for their sake. Meanwhile most
+writers who are not famous and are not rich and have no particular
+clout are being treated horribly by the publishing industry, and it's
+even worse in music. I recommend all of you to read Courtney Love's
+article: it's in Salon magazine right?</p>
<p><strong>AM2</strong> (Audience member 2) Yes</p>
<p><strong>RMS</strong>: She started out by calling the record
companies quote pirates unquotes because of the way they treat the
-musicians. In any case we can shorten copyright more or less. We could
-try various lengths, we could see, we could find out empirically what
-length of copyright is needed to keep publication vigourous. I would
-say that since almost books are out of print by ten years, clearly ten
-years should be long enough. But it doesn't have to be the same for
-every kind of work. For example, maybe some aspects of copyright for
-movies should last for longer, like the rights to sell all the
-paraphernalia with the pictures and characters on them. You know,
-that's so crassly commercial it hardly matters if that is limited to
-one company in most cases. Maybe the copyright on the movies
-themselves, maybe that's legitimate for that to last twenty
+musicians. In any case we can shorten copyright more or less. We
+could try various lengths, we could see, we could find out empirically
+what length of copyright is needed to keep publication vigourous. I
+would say that since almost books are out of print by ten years,
+clearly ten years should be long enough. But it doesn't have to be
+the same for every kind of work. For example, maybe some aspects of
+copyright for movies should last for longer, like the rights to sell
+all the paraphernalia with the pictures and characters on them. You
+know, that's so crassly commercial it hardly matters if that is
+limited to one company in most cases. Maybe the copyright on the
+movies themselves, maybe that's legitimate for that to last twenty
years. Meanwhile for software, I suspect that a three year copyright
-would be enough. you see if each version of the programme remains
+would be enough. You see if each version of the programme remains
copyrighted for three years after its release well, unless the company
is in real bad trouble they should have a new version before those
three years are up and there will be a lot of people who will want to
use the newer version, so if older versions are all becoming free
software automatically, the company would still have a business with
-the newer version. Now this is a compromise as I see it, because it is
-a system in which not all software is free, but it might be an
+the newer version. Now this is a compromise as I see it, because it
+is a system in which not all software is free, but it might be an
acceptable compromise, after all, if we had to wait three years in
some cases for programs to become free… well, that's no
disaster. To be using three years old software is not a disaster.</p>
@@ -604,35 +615,34 @@
can be released. So it could be deposited say, with the library of
congress in the US, and I think other countries have similar
institutions where copies of published books get placed, and they
-could also received the source code and after three years, publish
-it. And of course, if the source code didn't correspond to the
-executable that would be fraud, and in fact if it really corresponds
-then they ought to be able to check that very easily when the work is
-published initially so you're publishing the source code and somebody
-there says alright “dot slash configure dot slash make”
-and sees if produces the same executables and uh.</p>
+could also received the source code and after three years, publish it.
+And of course, if the source code didn't correspond to the executable
+that would be fraud, and in fact if it really corresponds then they
+ought to be able to check that very easily when the work is published
+initially so you're publishing the source code and somebody there says
+alright “dot slash configure dot slash make” and sees if
+produces the same executables and uh.</p>
<p>So you're right, just eliminating copyright would not make software
free.</p>
<p><strong>AM5</strong>: Um libre</p>
-<p><strong>RMS</strong>: Right. That's the only sense I use the
-term. It wouldn't do that because the source code might not be
-available or they might try to use contracts to restrict the users
-instead. So making software free is not as simple as ending copyright
-on software: it's a more complex situation than that. In fact, if
-copyright were simply abolished from software then we would no longer
-be able to use copyleft to protect the free status of a program but
-meanwhile the software privateers could use other
-methods—contracts or withholding the source to make software
-proprietary. So what would mean is, if we release a free program some
-greedy bastard could make a modified version and publish just the
-binaries and make people sign non-disclosure agreements for them. We
-would no longer have a way to stop them. So if we wanted to change the
-law that all software that was published had to be free we would have
-to do it in some more complex way, not just by turning copyright for
-software. </p>
+<p><strong>RMS</strong>: Right. That's the only sense I use the term.
+It wouldn't do that because the source code might not be available or
+they might try to use contracts to restrict the users instead. So
+making software free is not as simple as ending copyright on software:
+it's a more complex situation than that. In fact, if copyright were
+simply abolished from software then we would no longer be able to use
+copyleft to protect the free status of a program but meanwhile the
+software privateers could use other methods—contracts or
+withholding the source to make software proprietary. So what would
+mean is, if we release a free program some greedy bastard could make a
+modified version and publish just the binaries and make people sign
+non-disclosure agreements for them. We would no longer have a way to
+stop them. So if we wanted to change the law that all software that
+was published had to be free we would have to do it in some more
+complex way, not just by turning copyright for software.</p>
<p>So, overall I would recommend we look at the various kinds of works
and the various different kinds of uses and then look for a new place
@@ -662,16 +672,17 @@
helping the author. Essentially advertising them, spreading around
these reasons to send them a dollar. Now right now the biggest reason
why more people don't just send some money to the authors is that it's
-a pain in the neck to do it. What are you going to do? Write a cheque?
-Then who are you going to mail the cheque to? You'd have to dig up
-their address, which might not be easy. But with a convenient internet
-payment system which makes it efficient to pay someone one dollar, then
-we could put this into all the copies, and then I think you'd find the
-mechanism starting to work well. It may take five of ten years for the
-ideas to spread around, because it's a cultural thing, you know, at
-first people might find it a little surprising but once it gets normal
-people would become accustomed to sending the money, and it wouldn't be
-a lot of money compared to what it costs to buy books today.</p>
+a pain in the neck to do it. What are you going to do? Write a
+cheque? Then who are you going to mail the cheque to? You'd have to
+dig up their address, which might not be easy. But with a convenient
+internet payment system which makes it efficient to pay someone one
+dollar, then we could put this into all the copies, and then I think
+you'd find the mechanism starting to work well. It may take five of
+ten years for the ideas to spread around, because it's a cultural
+thing, you know, at first people might find it a little surprising but
+once it gets normal people would become accustomed to sending the
+money, and it wouldn't be a lot of money compared to what it costs to
+buy books today.</p>
<p><em>[drinks]</em></p>
@@ -679,55 +690,57 @@
aesthetic works, maybe this could a successful method. But it won't
work for the functional works, and the reason for that is that as one
person after another makes a modified version and publishes it, who
-should the boxes point to, and how much money should they send, and you
-know, it's easy to do this when the work was published just once, by a
-certain author, or certain group of authors, and they can just agree
-together what they're going to do and click on the box, if no-one is
-publishing modified versions then every copy will contain the same box
-with the same URL directing money to the same people but when you have
-different version which have been worked on by different people there's
-no simple automatic way of working out who ought to get what fraction
-of what users donate for this version or that version. It's
-philosophically hard to decide how important each contribution is, and
-all the obvious ways of trying to measure it are <em>[emphasis]</em> obviously
-<em>[/emphasis]</em> wrong in some cases, they're obviously closing their eyes
-to some important part of the facts so I think that this kind of
-solution is probably not feasible when everybody is free to publish
-modified versions. But for those kinds of works where it is not crucial
-to have the freedom to publish modified versions then this solution can
-be applied very simply once we have the convenient internet payment
-system to base it on.</p>
-
-<p>With regard to the aesthetic works. If there is a system where those
-who commercially redistribute or maybe even those who are publishing a
-modified version might have to negotiate the sharing of the payments
-with the original developers and then this kind of scheme could be
-extended to those works too even if modified versions are permitted
-there could be some standard formula which could be in some cases
-renegotiated, so I think in some cases probably possible even with a
-system of permitting in some way publishing modified versions of the
-aesthetic works it may be possible still to have this kind of voluntary
-payment system.</p>
+should the boxes point to, and how much money should they send, and
+you know, it's easy to do this when the work was published just once,
+by a certain author, or certain group of authors, and they can just
+agree together what they're going to do and click on the box, if
+no-one is publishing modified versions then every copy will contain
+the same box with the same URL directing money to the same people but
+when you have different version which have been worked on by different
+people there's no simple automatic way of working out who ought to get
+what fraction of what users donate for this version or that version.
+It's philosophically hard to decide how important each contribution
+is, and all the obvious ways of trying to measure it
+are <em>[emphasis]</em> obviously
+<em>[/emphasis]</em> wrong in some cases, they're obviously closing
+their eyes to some important part of the facts so I think that this
+kind of solution is probably not feasible when everybody is free to
+publish modified versions. But for those kinds of works where it is
+not crucial to have the freedom to publish modified versions then this
+solution can be applied very simply once we have the convenient
+internet payment system to base it on.</p>
+
+<p>With regard to the aesthetic works. If there is a system where
+those who commercially redistribute or maybe even those who are
+publishing a modified version might have to negotiate the sharing of
+the payments with the original developers and then this kind of scheme
+could be extended to those works too even if modified versions are
+permitted there could be some standard formula which could be in some
+cases renegotiated, so I think in some cases probably possible even
+with a system of permitting in some way publishing modified versions
+of the aesthetic works it may be possible still to have this kind of
+voluntary payment system.</p>
<p>Now I believe there a people who are trying to set up such
voluntary payment systems. I heard of something called the street
performer's protocol. I don't know the details of it. And I believe
there is something called GreenWitch.com <em>[transcriber's note: URL
uncertain]</em> I believe the people there are trying to set up
-something more or less like this. I think that what they are hoping to
-do is collect a bunch of payments that you make to various different
-people, and eventually charge your credit card once it gets to be big
-enough so that it's efficient. Whether those kind of systems work
-smoothly enough in practice that they'll get going is not clear, and
-whether they will become adopted widely enough for them to become a
-normal cultural practice is not clear. It may be that in order for
-these voluntary payments to truly catch on we need to have some kind
-of… you need to see the idea everywhere in order to…
-“Yeah, I outta pay“ once in a while. We'll see.</p>
-
-<p>There is evidence ideas like this are not unreasonable. If you look
-at for example public radio in the US, which is mostly supported by
-donations from listeners, you have I believe, millions of people
+something more or less like this. I think that what they are hoping
+to do is collect a bunch of payments that you make to various
+different people, and eventually charge your credit card once it gets
+to be big enough so that it's efficient. Whether those kind of
+systems work smoothly enough in practice that they'll get going is not
+clear, and whether they will become adopted widely enough for them to
+become a normal cultural practice is not clear. It may be that in
+order for these voluntary payments to truly catch on we need to have
+some kind of… you need to see the idea everywhere in order
+to… “Yeah, I outta pay“ once in a while. We'll
+see.</p>
+
+<p>There is evidence ideas like this are not unreasonable. If you
+look at for example public radio in the US, which is mostly supported
+by donations from listeners, you have I believe, millions of people
donating, I'm not sure how many exactly but there are many public
radio stations which are supported by their listeners and they seem to
be finding it easier to get donations as time goes on. Ten years ago
@@ -740,10 +753,10 @@
<p>Fundamentally, the stated purpose of copyright: to encourage
righting is a worthwhile purpose, but we have to look at ways of ways
-to achieve it that are not so harsh, and not so constricting of the use
-of the works whose developments we have encouraged and I believe that
-digital technology is providing us with solutions to the problem as
-well as creating a context where we need to solve the problem. So
+to achieve it that are not so harsh, and not so constricting of the
+use of the works whose developments we have encouraged and I believe
+that digital technology is providing us with solutions to the problem
+as well as creating a context where we need to solve the problem. So
that's the end of this talk, and are there questions?</p>
<h3>Questions and discussion</h3>
@@ -757,9 +770,9 @@
<p><strong>AM6</strong> (Audience member 6): Who will decide in which
of your three categories will a work fit?</p>
-<p><strong>RMS</strong>: I don't know. I'm sure there are various ways
-of deciding. You can probably tell a novel when you see one. I suspect
-judges can tell a novel when they see one too.</p>
+<p><strong>RMS</strong>: I don't know. I'm sure there are various
+ways of deciding. You can probably tell a novel when you see one. I
+suspect judges can tell a novel when they see one too.</p>
<p><strong>AM7</strong>: Any comment on encryption? And the
interaction of encryption devices with copyrighted materials?</p>
@@ -801,8 +814,8 @@
you could also say “I signed this contract but it's not valid in
France so I am publicly disobeying, and I challenge them to sue
me.” Now that you might consider doing, and if you're right and
-the laws are not valid in France then the case would get thrown out. I
-don't know. Maybe that is a good idea to do, I don't know whether,
+the laws are not valid in France then the case would get thrown out.
+I don't know. Maybe that is a good idea to do, I don't know whether,
what its effects politically would be. I know that there was just a
couple of years ago a law was passed in Europe to prohibit some kind
of private copying of music, and the record companies trotted out some
@@ -814,7 +827,8 @@
designed to accomplish that. Now, I'm no expert on how to accomplish
that in Europe but that's what people should think about.</p>
-<p><strong>AM6</strong>: What about protection of private correspondence?</p>
+<p><strong>AM6</strong>: What about protection of private
+correspondence?</p>
<p><strong>RMS</strong>: Well, if you're not <em>[emphasis]</em>
publishing <em>[/emphasis]</em> it that's a completely different
@@ -831,22 +845,22 @@
copyright.</p>
<p><strong>RMS</strong>: Well, you can't make him keep secret the
-contents and I'm not sure actually. I mean to me, I think there's some
-injustice in that. If you for example, send a letter to somebody
+contents and I'm not sure actually. I mean to me, I think there's
+some injustice in that. If you for example, send a letter to somebody
threatening to sue him and then you tell him you can't tell anybody I
did this because my threat is copyrighted, that's pretty obnoxious,
and I'm not sure that it would even be upheld.</p>
<p><strong>AM6</strong>: Well, there are circumstances where I want to
correspond with someone and keep my (and their) reply, entirely
-private. </p>
+private.</p>
<p><strong>RMS</strong>: Well if you and they agree to keep it
private, then that's a different matter entirely. I'm sorry the two
issues can not be linked, and I don't have time to consider that issue
-today. There's another talk scheduled to start soon. But I think it is
-a total mistake for copyright to apply to such situations. The ethics
-of those situations are completely different from the ethics of
+today. There's another talk scheduled to start soon. But I think it
+is a total mistake for copyright to apply to such situations. The
+ethics of those situations are completely different from the ethics of
published works and so they should be treated in an appropriate way,
which is completely different.</p>
@@ -855,10 +869,10 @@
<p><strong>RMS</strong>: <em>[interrupts]</em> No you're wrong. If
people have agreed to keep something private then you have other
-redress. In Europe there are privacy laws, and the other thing is, you
-don't have a right to force someone to keep secrets for you. At most,
-you could force him to paraphrase it, because he has a right to tell
-people what you did.</p>
+redress. In Europe there are privacy laws, and the other thing is,
+you don't have a right to force someone to keep secrets for you. At
+most, you could force him to paraphrase it, because he has a right to
+tell people what you did.</p>
<p><strong>AM6</strong>: Yes, but I assuming that the two people at
either end are both in reasonable agreement.</p>
@@ -891,17 +905,17 @@
changes <em>[inaudible, in trade secrets?]</em></p>
<p><strong>RMS</strong>: Uh yes: Trade secrets has developed in a very
-ominous and menacing direction. It used to be that trade secrecy meant
-that you wanted to keep something secret so you didn't tell anybody,
-and later on it was something that was done within a business telling
-just a few people something and they would agree to keep it
+ominous and menacing direction. It used to be that trade secrecy
+meant that you wanted to keep something secret so you didn't tell
+anybody, and later on it was something that was done within a business
+telling just a few people something and they would agree to keep it
secret. But now, it's turning into something where the public in
general is becoming conscripted into keeping secrets for business even
if they have never agreed in any way to keep these secrets and that's
a pressure. So those who pretend that trade secrecy is just carrying
-out some natural right of theirs; that's just not true any
-more. They're getting explicit government help in forcing other people
-to keep their secrets. And we might want to consider whether
+out some natural right of theirs; that's just not true any more.
+They're getting explicit government help in forcing other people to
+keep their secrets. And we might want to consider whether
non-disclosure agreements should in general be considered legitimate
contracts because of the anti-social nature of trade secrecy it
shouldn't be considered automatic that just because somebody has
@@ -966,39 +980,40 @@
<p>So what should be done, is that these journals should go one step
further. In addition to saying everybody can access the site they
-should be saying, everyone can set up a mirror site. Even if they said,
-you have to do the whole publication of this journal, together with our
-advertisements, now that would still at least do the job of making the
-availability redundant so that it's not in danger, and other
-institutions would set up mirror sites, and I predict that you would
-find ten years down the road, a very well organised unofficial system
-of co-ordinating the mirroring to make sure that nothing was getting
-left out. At this point the amount that it costs to set up the mirror
-site for years of a journal is so little that it doesn't require any
-special funding; nobody has to work very hard: just let librarians do
-it. Anyway, oh there was some other thing that this raised and I can't
-remember what it is. Oh well, I'll just have to let it go.</p>
+should be saying, everyone can set up a mirror site. Even if they
+said, you have to do the whole publication of this journal, together
+with our advertisements, now that would still at least do the job of
+making the availability redundant so that it's not in danger, and
+other institutions would set up mirror sites, and I predict that you
+would find ten years down the road, a very well organised unofficial
+system of co-ordinating the mirroring to make sure that nothing was
+getting left out. At this point the amount that it costs to set up
+the mirror site for years of a journal is so little that it doesn't
+require any special funding; nobody has to work very hard: just let
+librarians do it. Anyway, oh there was some other thing that this
+raised and I can't remember what it is. Oh well, I'll just have to
+let it go.</p>
<p><strong>AM13</strong>: The financing problem for the aesthetical
works… do you think the dynamics could
be… <em>[inaudible]</em> although I understand the problems
-of… I mean who's contributing? and who will be rewarded? Does
+of… I mean who's contributing? And who will be rewarded? Does
the spirit of free software <em>[inaudible]</em></p>
<p><strong>RMS</strong>: I don't know. It's certainly suggesting the
idea to people. We'll see. I don't the answers, I don't know how
we're going to get there, I'm trying to think about where we should
get to. I know know how we can get there. The publishers are so
-powerful, and can get governments to do their bidding. How we're going
-to build up the kind of world where the public refuses to tolerate
-this any more I don't know. I think the first thing we have to do is
-to clearly reject the term pirate and the views that go with it. Every
-time we hear that we have to speak out and say this is propaganda,
-it's not wrong for people to share these published works with each
-other, it's sharing with you friend, it's good. And sharing with your
-friend is more important than how much money these companies get. The
-society shouldn't be shaped for the sake of these companies. We have
-to keep on… because you see the idea that they've
+powerful, and can get governments to do their bidding. How we're
+going to build up the kind of world where the public refuses to
+tolerate this any more I don't know. I think the first thing we have
+to do is to clearly reject the term pirate and the views that go with
+it. Every time we hear that we have to speak out and say this is
+propaganda, it's not wrong for people to share these published works
+with each other, it's sharing with you friend, it's good. And sharing
+with your friend is more important than how much money these companies
+get. The society shouldn't be shaped for the sake of these companies.
+We have to keep on… because you see the idea that they've
spread—that anything that reduces their income is immoral and
therefore people must be restricted in any way it takes to guarantee
for them to be paid for everything… that is the fundamental
@@ -1009,9 +1024,9 @@
based on that but you rarely find anybody (except me) saying that the
whole point of the change is wrong, that it's wrong to restrict it in
that way, that it's legitimate for people to want to change copies and
-that they should be allowed to. We have to have more of this. We have
-to start cutting the root of their dominion not just hacking away at a
-few leaves.</p>
+that they should be allowed to. We have to have more of this. We
+have to start cutting the root of their dominion not just hacking away
+at a few leaves.</p>
<p><strong>AM14</strong>: <em>[inaudible]</em> this is important is to
concentrate on the donations system for music.</p>
@@ -1026,12 +1041,12 @@
<p><strong>AM15</strong>: We only take French laws</p>
<p><strong>RMS</strong>: I don't know. I think I'd better hand the
-floor over to Melanie whose talk was supposed to start at 3. and uh
+floor over to Melanie whose talk was supposed to start at 3. And uh
so</p>
<p>RMS stands in silence. There is a pause before the outbreak of
-applause. RMS turns to applaud the stuffed fabric gnu he placed on the
-overhead projector at the beginning of the talk.</p>
+applause. RMS turns to applaud the stuffed fabric gnu he placed on
+the overhead projector at the beginning of the talk.</p>
</div>
@@ -1040,12 +1055,11 @@
<p>
Please send FSF & GNU inquiries to
-<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
-There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
-the FSF.
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>. There are
+also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> the FSF.
<br />
-Please send broken links and other corrections (or suggestions) to
-<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
+Please send broken links and other corrections or suggestions to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>.
</p>
<p>
@@ -1056,9 +1070,8 @@
</p>
<p>
-Copyright © 2001, 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
+Copyright © 2001, 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
</p>
-<address>51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110, USA</address>
<p>Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is
permitted in any medium, provided this notice is preserved.
</p>
@@ -1066,7 +1079,7 @@
<p>
Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2009/11/30 22:44:00 $
+$Date: 2009/12/02 15:16:39 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
@@ -1074,22 +1087,25 @@
<div id="translations">
<h4>Translations of this page</h4>
-<!-- Please keep this list alphabetical. -->
-<!-- Comment what the language is for each type, i.e. de is Deutsch.-->
-<!-- If you add a new language here, please -->
-<!-- advise address@hidden and add it to -->
-<!-- - /home/www/bin/nightly-vars either TAGSLANG or WEBLANG -->
-<!-- - /home/www/html/server/standards/README.translations.html -->
-<!-- - one of the lists under the section "Translations Underway" -->
-<!-- - if there is a translation team, you also have to add an alias -->
-<!-- to mail.gnu.org:/com/mailer/aliases -->
-<!-- Please also check you have the 2 letter language code right versus -->
-<!-- <URL:http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ert/iso639.htm> -->
-<!-- Please use W3C normative character entities -->
+<!-- Please keep this list alphabetical by language code.
+ Comment what the language is for each type, i.e. de is German.
+ Write the language name in its own language (Deutsch) in the text.
+ If you add a new language here, please
+ advise address@hidden and add it to
+ - /home/www/html/server/standards/README.translations.html
+ - one of the lists under the section "Translations Underway"
+ - if there is a translation team, you also have to add an alias
+ to mail.gnu.org:/com/mailer/aliases
+ Please also check you have the language code right; see:
+ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
+ If the 2-letter ISO 639-1 code is not available,
+ use the 3-letter ISO 639-2.
+ Please use W3C normative character entities. -->
<ul class="translations-list">
<!-- English -->
<li><a
href="/philosophy/copyright-versus-community-2000.html">English</a> [en]</li>
+<li><a
href="/philosophy/copyright-versus-community-2000.fr.html">français</a> [fr]</li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
Index: copyright-versus-community.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/copyright-versus-community.html,v
retrieving revision 1.11
retrieving revision 1.12
diff -u -b -r1.11 -r1.12
--- copyright-versus-community.html 1 Dec 2009 20:32:33 -0000 1.11
+++ copyright-versus-community.html 2 Dec 2009 15:16:39 -0000 1.12
@@ -9,9 +9,10 @@
<dl>
<dt>BC:</dt>
-<dd><p>Tena koutou, tena koutou, tena koutou katoa. Today I have the privilege
-of introducing Richard Stallman, whose keynote speech is being sponsored by
-the School of Information Management at Victoria University of Wellington.</p>
+<dd><p>Tena koutou, tena koutou, tena koutou katoa. Today I have the
+privilege of introducing Richard Stallman, whose keynote speech is
+being sponsored by the School of Information Management at Victoria
+University of Wellington.</p>
<p>Richard has been working to promote software freedom for over 25
years. In 1983 he started the GNU project to develop a free operating
@@ -20,535 +21,582 @@
the Mailman software which is part of the GNU project. So whether you
realize it or not, Richard's work has touched all of your lives.</p>
-<p>I like to describe him as the most influential person most people have never
-heard of, although he tells me that that cannot possibly be true because it
-cannot be tested.</p></dd>
+<p>I like to describe him as the most influential person most people
+have never heard of, although he tells me that that cannot possibly be
+true because it cannot be tested.</p></dd>
<dt>RMS:</dt>
<dd>We can't tell.</dd>
<dt>BC:</dt>
-<dd><p>I said that—I still like it. His ideas about software freedom
and free
-access to information were used by Tim Berners-Lee when he created the
-world's first web server, and in 1999 his musings about a free online
-encyclopedia inspired Jimmy Wales to set up what is now Wikipedia.</p>
-
-<p>Today Richard will be talking to us about copyright vs community in the age
-of computer networks, and their implications for libraries. Richard.</p></dd>
+<dd><p>I said that—I still like it. His ideas about software
+freedom and free access to information were used by Tim Berners-Lee
+when he created the world's first web server, and in 1999 his musings
+about a free online encyclopedia inspired Jimmy Wales to set up what
+is now Wikipedia.</p>
+
+<p>Today Richard will be talking to us about copyright vs community in
+the age of computer networks, and their implications for libraries.
+Richard.</p></dd>
<dt>RMS:</dt>
-<dd><p>I've been in New Zealand for a couple of weeks, and in the North Island
-it was raining most of the time. Now I know why they call gumboots
-“Wellingtons”. And then I saw somebody who was making chairs and
tables out of
-ponga wood, and he called it fern-iture. Then we took the ferry to get here,
-and as soon as we got off, people started mocking and insulting us; but there
-were no hard feelings, they just wanted to make us really feel Picton.</p>
-
-<p>The reason people usually invite me to give speeches is because of my work
-on free software. This is not a talk about free software; this talk answers
-the question whether the ideas of free software extend to other kinds of
-works. But in order for that to make sense, I'd better tell you briefly what
-free software means.</p>
-
-<p>Free software is a matter of freedom, not price, so think of “free
speech”,
-not “free beer”. Free software is software that respects the
user's freedom,
-and there are four specific freedoms that the user deserves always to have.</p>
+<dd><p>I've been in New Zealand for a couple of weeks, and in the
+North Island it was raining most of the time. Now I know why they
+call gumboots “Wellingtons”. And then I saw somebody who
+was making chairs and tables out of ponga wood, and he called it
+fern-iture. Then we took the ferry to get here, and as soon as we got
+off, people started mocking and insulting us; but there were no hard
+feelings, they just wanted to make us really feel Picton.</p>
+
+<p>The reason people usually invite me to give speeches is because of
+my work on free software. This is not a talk about free software;
+this talk answers the question whether the ideas of free software
+extend to other kinds of works. But in order for that to make sense,
+I'd better tell you briefly what free software means.</p>
+
+<p>Free software is a matter of freedom, not price, so think of
+“free speech”, not “free beer”. Free software
+is software that respects the user's freedom, and there are four
+specific freedoms that the user deserves always to have.</p>
<ul>
<li>Freedom 0 is the freedom to run the program as you wish.</li>
-<li>Freedom 1 is the freedom to study the source code of the program and
-change it to make the program do what you wish.</li>
-
-<li>Freedom 2 is the freedom to help your neighbour; that is, the freedom to
-redistribute copies of the program, exact copies when you wish.</li>
+<li>Freedom 1 is the freedom to study the source code of the program
+and change it to make the program do what you wish.</li>
-<li>And Freedom 3 is the freedom to contribute to your community. That's the
-freedom to publish your modified versions when you wish.</li>
+<li>Freedom 2 is the freedom to help your neighbour; that is, the
+freedom to redistribute copies of the program, exact copies when you
+wish.</li>
+
+<li>And Freedom 3 is the freedom to contribute to your community.
+That's the freedom to publish your modified versions when you
+wish.</li>
</ul>
-<p>If the program gives you these four freedoms then it's free software, which
-means the social system of its distribution and use is an ethical system,
-one which respects the user's freedom and the social solidarity of the
-user's community. But if one of these freedoms is missing or insufficient,
-then it's proprietary software, nonfree software, user-subjugating
-software. It's unethical. It's not a contribution to society, it's a power
-grab. This unethical practice should not exist; the goal of the free
-software movement is to put an end to it. All software should be free, so
-that all users can be free.</p>
-
-<p>Proprietary software keeps the users divided and helpless: divided, because
-they're forbidden to share it, and helpless, because they don't have the
-source code so they can't change it. They can't even study it to verify what
-it's really doing to them, and many proprietary programs have malicious
-features which spy on the user, restrict the user, even back doors to attack
-the user.</p>
-
-<p>For instance, Microsoft Windows has a back door with which Microsoft can
-forcibly install software changes, without getting permission from the
-supposed owner of the computer. You may think it's your computer, but if
-you've made the mistake of having Windows running in it, then really
-Microsoft has owned your computer. Computers need to be defenestrated, which
-means either throw Windows out of the computer, or throw the computer out
-the window.</p>
-
-<p>But any proprietary software gives the developers unjust power over the
-users. Some of the developers abuse this power more, and some abuse it less,
-but none of them ought to have it. You deserve to have control of your
-computing, and not be forcibly dependent on a particular company. So you
-deserve free software.</p>
-
-<p>At the end of speeches about free software, people sometimes ask whether
-these same freedoms and ideas apply to other things. If you have a copy of a
-published work on your computer, it makes sense to ask whether you should
-have the same four freedoms—whether it's ethically essential that you
have
-them or not. And that's the question that I'm going to address today.</p>
-
-<p>If you have a copy of something that's not software, for the most part, the
-only thing that might deny you any of these freedoms is copyright law. With
-software that's not so. The main ways of making software non-free are
-contracts and withholding the source code from the users. Copyright is a
-sort of secondary, back up method. For other things there's no such
-distinction as between source code and executable code.</p>
-
-<p>For instance, if we're talking about a text, if you can see the text to read
-it, there's nothing in the text that you can't see. So it's not the same
-kind of issue exactly as software. It's for the most part only copyright
-that might deny you these freedoms.</p>
-
-<p>So the question can be restated: “What should copyright law allow you
to do
-with published works? What should copyright law say?”</p>
-
-<p>Copyright has developed along with copying technology, so it's useful to
-review the history of copying technology. Copying developed in the ancient
-world, where you'd use a writing instrument on a writing surface. You'd read
-one copy and write another.</p>
-
-<p>This technology was rather inefficient, but
-another interesting characteristic was that it had no economy of scale.
-To write ten copies would take ten times as long as to write one copy. It
-required no special equipment other than the equipment for writing, and it
-required no special skill other than literacy itself. The result was that
-copies of any particular book were made in a decentralized manner. Wherever
-there was a copy, if someone wanted to copy it, he could.</p>
-
-<p>There was nothing like copyright in the ancient world. If you had a copy
and
-wanted to copy it, nobody was going to tell you you weren't
allowed—except
-if the local prince didn't like what the book said, in which case he might
-punish you for copying it. But that's not copyright, but rather something
-closely related, namely censorship. To this day, copyright is often used in
-attempts to censor people.</p>
-
-<p>That went on for thousands of years, but then there was a big advance in
-copying technology, namely the printing press. The printing press made
-copying more efficient, but not uniformly. [This was] because mass
-production copying became a lot more efficient, but making one copy at a
-time didn't benefit from the printing press. In fact, you were better off
-just writing it by hand; that would be faster than trying to print one
copy.</p>
-
-<p>The printing press has an economy of scale: it takes a lot of work to
-set the type, but then you can make many copies very fast. Also, the
-printing press and the type were expensive equipment that most people
-didn't own; and the ability to use them, most literate people didn't
-know. Using a press was a different skill from writing. The result
-was a centralized manner of producing copies: the copies of any given
-book would be made in a few places, and then they would be transported
-to wherever someone wanted to buy copies.</p>
-
-<p>Copyright began in the age of the printing press. Copyright in England
began
-as a system of censorship in the 1500s. I believe it was originally meant to
-censor Protestants, but it was turned around and used to censor Catholics
-and presumably lots of others as well. According to this law, in order to
-publish a book you had to get permission from the Crown, and this permission
-was granted in the form of a perpetual monopoly to publish it. This was
-allowed to lapse in the 1680s, I believe [it expired in 1695 according to
-the Wikipedia entry]. The publishers wanted it back again, but what they got
-was something somewhat different. The Statute of Anne gave authors a
-copyright, and only for 14 years, although the author could renew it once.</p>
-
-<p>This was a totally different idea—a temporary monopoly for the author,
-instead of a perpetual monopoly for the publisher. The idea developed that
-copyright was a means of promoting writing.</p>
-
-<p>When the US constitution was written, some people wanted authors to be
-entitled to a copyright, but that was rejected. Instead, the US Constitution
-says that Congress can optionally adopt a copyright law, and if there is a
-copyright law, its purpose is to promote progress. In other words, the
-purpose is not benefits for copyright holders or anybody they do business
-with, but for the general public. Copyright has to last a limited time;
-publishers keep hoping for us to forget about this.</p>
-
-<p>Here we have an idea of copyright which is an industrial regulation on
-publishers, controlled by authors, and designed to provide benefits to the
-public at large. It functioned this way because it didn't restrict the
-readers.</p>
-
-<p>Now in the early centuries of printing, and still I believe in the 1790s,
-lots of readers wrote copies by hand because they couldn't afford printed
-copies. Nobody ever expected copyright law to be something other than an
-industrial regulation. It wasn't meant to stop people from writing copies,
-it was meant to regulate the publishers. Because of this it was easy to
-enforce, uncontroversial, and arguably beneficial for society.</p>
+<p>If the program gives you these four freedoms then it's free
+software, which means the social system of its distribution and use is
+an ethical system, one which respects the user's freedom and the
+social solidarity of the user's community. But if one of these
+freedoms is missing or insufficient, then it's proprietary software,
+nonfree software, user-subjugating software. It's unethical. It's
+not a contribution to society, it's a power grab. This unethical
+practice should not exist; the goal of the free software movement is
+to put an end to it. All software should be free, so that all users
+can be free.</p>
+
+<p>Proprietary software keeps the users divided and helpless: divided,
+because they're forbidden to share it, and helpless, because they
+don't have the source code so they can't change it. They can't even
+study it to verify what it's really doing to them, and many
+proprietary programs have malicious features which spy on the user,
+restrict the user, even back doors to attack the user.</p>
+
+<p>For instance, Microsoft Windows has a back door with which
+Microsoft can forcibly install software changes, without getting
+permission from the supposed owner of the computer. You may think
+it's your computer, but if you've made the mistake of having Windows
+running in it, then really Microsoft has owned your computer.
+Computers need to be defenestrated, which means either throw Windows
+out of the computer, or throw the computer out the window.</p>
+
+<p>But any proprietary software gives the developers unjust power over
+the users. Some of the developers abuse this power more, and some
+abuse it less, but none of them ought to have it. You deserve to have
+control of your computing, and not be forcibly dependent on a
+particular company. So you deserve free software.</p>
+
+<p>At the end of speeches about free software, people sometimes ask
+whether these same freedoms and ideas apply to other things. If you
+have a copy of a published work on your computer, it makes sense to
+ask whether you should have the same four freedoms—whether it's
+ethically essential that you have them or not. And that's the
+question that I'm going to address today.</p>
+
+<p>If you have a copy of something that's not software, for the most
+part, the only thing that might deny you any of these freedoms is
+copyright law. With software that's not so. The main ways of making
+software non-free are contracts and withholding the source code from
+the users. Copyright is a sort of secondary, back up method. For
+other things there's no such distinction as between source code and
+executable code.</p>
+
+<p>For instance, if we're talking about a text, if you can see the
+text to read it, there's nothing in the text that you can't see. So
+it's not the same kind of issue exactly as software. It's for the
+most part only copyright that might deny you these freedoms.</p>
+
+<p>So the question can be restated: “What should copyright law
+allow you to do with published works? What should copyright law
+say?”</p>
+
+<p>Copyright has developed along with copying technology, so it's
+useful to review the history of copying technology. Copying developed
+in the ancient world, where you'd use a writing instrument on a
+writing surface. You'd read one copy and write another.</p>
+
+<p>This technology was rather inefficient, but another interesting
+characteristic was that it had no economy of scale. To write ten
+copies would take ten times as long as to write one copy. It required
+no special equipment other than the equipment for writing, and it
+required no special skill other than literacy itself. The result was
+that copies of any particular book were made in a decentralized
+manner. Wherever there was a copy, if someone wanted to copy it, he
+could.</p>
+
+<p>There was nothing like copyright in the ancient world. If you had
+a copy and wanted to copy it, nobody was going to tell you you weren't
+allowed—except if the local prince didn't like what the book
+said, in which case he might punish you for copying it. But that's
+not copyright, but rather something closely related, namely
+censorship. To this day, copyright is often used in attempts to
+censor people.</p>
+
+<p>That went on for thousands of years, but then there was a big
+advance in copying technology, namely the printing press. The
+printing press made copying more efficient, but not uniformly. [This
+was] because mass production copying became a lot more efficient, but
+making one copy at a time didn't benefit from the printing press. In
+fact, you were better off just writing it by hand; that would be
+faster than trying to print one copy.</p>
+
+<p>The printing press has an economy of scale: it takes a lot of work
+to set the type, but then you can make many copies very fast. Also,
+the printing press and the type were expensive equipment that most
+people didn't own; and the ability to use them, most literate people
+didn't know. Using a press was a different skill from writing. The
+result was a centralized manner of producing copies: the copies of any
+given book would be made in a few places, and then they would be
+transported to wherever someone wanted to buy copies.</p>
+
+<p>Copyright began in the age of the printing press. Copyright in
+England began as a system of censorship in the 1500s. I believe it
+was originally meant to censor Protestants, but it was turned around
+and used to censor Catholics and presumably lots of others as well.
+According to this law, in order to publish a book you had to get
+permission from the Crown, and this permission was granted in the form
+of a perpetual monopoly to publish it. This was allowed to lapse in
+the 1680s, I believe [it expired in 1695 according to the Wikipedia
+entry]. The publishers wanted it back again, but what they got was
+something somewhat different. The Statute of Anne gave authors a
+copyright, and only for 14 years, although the author could renew it
+once.</p>
+
+<p>This was a totally different idea—a temporary monopoly for
+the author, instead of a perpetual monopoly for the publisher. The
+idea developed that copyright was a means of promoting writing.</p>
+
+<p>When the US constitution was written, some people wanted authors to
+be entitled to a copyright, but that was rejected. Instead, the US
+Constitution says that Congress can optionally adopt a copyright law,
+and if there is a copyright law, its purpose is to promote progress.
+In other words, the purpose is not benefits for copyright holders or
+anybody they do business with, but for the general public. Copyright
+has to last a limited time; publishers keep hoping for us to forget
+about this.</p>
+
+<p>Here we have an idea of copyright which is an industrial regulation
+on publishers, controlled by authors, and designed to provide benefits
+to the public at large. It functioned this way because it didn't
+restrict the readers.</p>
+
+<p>Now in the early centuries of printing, and still I believe in the
+1790s, lots of readers wrote copies by hand because they couldn't
+afford printed copies. Nobody ever expected copyright law to be
+something other than an industrial regulation. It wasn't meant to
+stop people from writing copies, it was meant to regulate the
+publishers. Because of this it was easy to enforce, uncontroversial,
+and arguably beneficial for society.</p>
<p>It was easy to enforce, because it only had to be enforced against
-publishers. And it's easy to find the unauthorized publishers of a
book—you
-go to a bookstore and say 'where do these copies come from?'. You don't have
-to invade everybody's home and everybody's computer to do that.</p>
-
-<p>It was uncontroversial because, as the readers were not restricted, they had
-nothing to complain about. Theoretically they were restricted from
-publishing, but not being publishers and not having printing presses, they
-couldn't do that anyway. In what they actually could do, they were not
-restricted.</p>
-
-<p>It was arguably beneficial because the general public, according to the
-concepts of copyright law, traded away a theoretical right they were not in
-a position to exercise. In exchange, they got the benefits of more
writing.</p>
-
-<p>Now if you trade away something you have no possible use for, and you get
-something you can use in exchange, it's a positive trade. Whether or not
-you could have gotten a better deal some other way, that's a different
-question, but at least it's positive.</p>
-
-<p>So if this were still in the age of the printing press, I don't think I'd be
-complaining about copyright law. But the age of the printing press is
-gradually giving way to the age of the computer networks—another advance
in
-copying technology that makes copying more efficient, and once again not
-uniformly so.</p>
-
-<p>Here's what we had in the age of the printing press: mass production very
-efficient, one at a time copying still just as slow as the ancient world.
-Digital technology gets us here: they've both benefited, but one-off copying
-has benefited the most.</p>
-
-<p>We get to a situation much more like the ancient world, where one at a
-time copying is not so much worse [i.e., harder] than mass production
-copying. It's a little bit less efficient, a little bit less good,
-but it's perfectly cheap enough that hundreds of millions of people do
-it. Consider how many people write CDs once in a while, even in poor
-countries. You may not have a CD-writer yourself, so you go to a
-store where you can do it.</p>
-
-<p>This means that copyright no longer fits in with the technology as it used
-to. Even if the words of copyright law had not changed, they wouldn't have
-the same effect. Instead of an industrial regulation on publishers
-controlled by authors, with the benefits set up to go to the public, it is
-now a restriction on the general public, controlled mainly by the publishers,
-in the name of the authors.</p>
+publishers. And it's easy to find the unauthorized publishers of a
+book—you go to a bookstore and say “where do these copies
+come from?”. You don't have to invade everybody's home and
+everybody's computer to do that.</p>
+
+<p>It was uncontroversial because, as the readers were not restricted,
+they had nothing to complain about. Theoretically they were
+restricted from publishing, but not being publishers and not having
+printing presses, they couldn't do that anyway. In what they actually
+could do, they were not restricted.</p>
+
+<p>It was arguably beneficial because the general public, according to
+the concepts of copyright law, traded away a theoretical right they
+were not in a position to exercise. In exchange, they got the
+benefits of more writing.</p>
+
+<p>Now if you trade away something you have no possible use for, and
+you get something you can use in exchange, it's a positive trade.
+Whether or not you could have gotten a better deal some other way,
+that's a different question, but at least it's positive.</p>
+
+<p>So if this were still in the age of the printing press, I don't
+think I'd be complaining about copyright law. But the age of the
+printing press is gradually giving way to the age of the computer
+networks—another advance in copying technology that makes
+copying more efficient, and once again not uniformly so.</p>
+
+<p>Here's what we had in the age of the printing press: mass
+production very efficient, one at a time copying still just as slow as
+the ancient world. Digital technology gets us here: they've both
+benefited, but one-off copying has benefited the most.</p>
+
+<p>We get to a situation much more like the ancient world, where one
+at a time copying is not so much worse [i.e., harder] than mass
+production copying. It's a little bit less efficient, a little bit
+less good, but it's perfectly cheap enough that hundreds of millions
+of people do it. Consider how many people write CDs once in a while,
+even in poor countries. You may not have a CD-writer yourself, so you
+go to a store where you can do it.</p>
+
+<p>This means that copyright no longer fits in with the technology as
+it used to. Even if the words of copyright law had not changed, they
+wouldn't have the same effect. Instead of an industrial regulation on
+publishers controlled by authors, with the benefits set up to go to
+the public, it is now a restriction on the general public, controlled
+mainly by the publishers, in the name of the authors.</p>
-<p>In other words, it's tyranny. It's intolerable and we can't allow it to
-continue this way.</p>
+<p>In other words, it's tyranny. It's intolerable and we can't allow
+it to continue this way.</p>
<p>As a result of this change, [copyright] is no longer easy to
enforce, no longer uncontroversial, and no longer beneficial.</p>
-<p>It's no longer easy to enforce because now the publishers want to enforce it
-against each and every person, and to do this requires cruel measures,
-draconian punishments, invasions of privacy, abolition of our basic ideas of
-justice. There's almost no limit to how far they will propose to go to
-prosecute the War on Sharing.</p>
-
-<p>It's no longer uncontroversial. There are political parties in several
-countries whose basic platform is 'freedom to share'.</p>
-
-<p>It's no longer beneficial because the freedoms that we conceptually traded
-away (because we couldn't exercise them), we now can exercise. They're
-tremendously useful, and we want to exercise them.</p>
+<p>It's no longer easy to enforce because now the publishers want to
+enforce it against each and every person, and to do this requires
+cruel measures, draconian punishments, invasions of privacy, abolition
+of our basic ideas of justice. There's almost no limit to how far
+they will propose to go to prosecute the War on Sharing.</p>
+
+<p>It's no longer uncontroversial. There are political parties in
+several countries whose basic platform is “freedom to
+share”.</p>
+
+<p>It's no longer beneficial because the freedoms that we conceptually
+traded away (because we couldn't exercise them), we now can exercise.
+They're tremendously useful, and we want to exercise them.</p>
<p>What would a democratic government do in this situation?</p>
-<p>It would reduce copyright power. It would say: “The trade we made on
behalf
-of our citizens, trading away some of their freedom which now they need, is
-intolerable. We have to change this; we can't trade away the freedom that is
-important.” We can measure the sickness of democracy by the tendency of
-governments to do the exact opposite around the world, extending copyright
-power when they should reduce it.</p>
-
-<p>One example is in the dimension of time. Around the world we see pressure
to
-make copyright last longer and longer and longer.</p>
-
-<p>A wave of this started in the US in 1998. Copyright was extended by 20
years
-on both past and future works. I do not understand how they hope to convince
-the now dead or senile writers of the 20s and 30s to write more back then by
-extending copyright on their works now. If they have a time machine with
-which to inform them, they haven't used it. Our history books don't say that
-there was a burst of vigor in the arts in the 20s when all the artists
-found out that their copyrights would be extended in 1998.</p>
-
-<p>It's theoretically conceivable that 20 years more copyright on future works
-would convince people to make more effort in producing those works. But not
-anyone rational, because the discounted present value of 20 more years of
-copyright starting 75 years in the future—if it's a work made for
hire—and
-probably even longer if it's a work with an individual copyright holder, is
-so small it couldn't persuade any rational person to do anything different.
-Any business that wants to claim otherwise ought to present its projected
-balance sheets for 75 years in the future, which of course they can't do
-because none of them really looks that far ahead.</p>
-
-<p>The real reason for this law, the desire that prompted various companies to
-purchase this law in the US Congress, which is how laws are decided on for
-the most part, was they had lucrative monopolies and they wanted those
-monopolies to continue.</p>
-
-<p>For instance, Disney was aware that the first film in which Mickey Mouse
-appeared would go into the public domain in a few years, and then anybody
-would be free to draw that same character as part of other works. Disney
-didn't want that to happen. Disney borrows a lot from the public domain, but
-is determined never to give the slightest thing back. So Disney paid for
-this law, which we refer to as the Mickey Mouse Copyright Act.</p>
+<p>It would reduce copyright power. It would say: “The trade we
+made on behalf of our citizens, trading away some of their freedom
+which now they need, is intolerable. We have to change this; we can't
+trade away the freedom that is important.” We can measure the
+sickness of democracy by the tendency of governments to do the exact
+opposite around the world, extending copyright power when they should
+reduce it.</p>
+
+<p>One example is in the dimension of time. Around the world we see
+pressure to make copyright last longer and longer and longer.</p>
+
+<p>A wave of this started in the US in 1998. Copyright was extended
+by 20 years on both past and future works. I do not understand how
+they hope to convince the now dead or senile writers of the 20s and
+30s to write more back then by extending copyright on their works now.
+If they have a time machine with which to inform them, they haven't
+used it. Our history books don't say that there was a burst of vigor
+in the arts in the 20s when all the artists found out that their
+copyrights would be extended in 1998.</p>
+
+<p>It's theoretically conceivable that 20 years more copyright on
+future works would convince people to make more effort in producing
+those works. But not anyone rational, because the discounted present
+value of 20 more years of copyright starting 75 years in the
+future—if it's a work made for hire—and probably even
+longer if it's a work with an individual copyright holder, is so small
+it couldn't persuade any rational person to do anything different.
+Any business that wants to claim otherwise ought to present its
+projected balance sheets for 75 years in the future, which of course
+they can't do because none of them really looks that far ahead.</p>
+
+<p>The real reason for this law, the desire that prompted various
+companies to purchase this law in the US Congress, which is how laws
+are decided on for the most part, was they had lucrative monopolies
+and they wanted those monopolies to continue.</p>
+
+<p>For instance, Disney was aware that the first film in which Mickey
+Mouse appeared would go into the public domain in a few years, and
+then anybody would be free to draw that same character as part of
+other works. Disney didn't want that to happen. Disney borrows a lot
+from the public domain, but is determined never to give the slightest
+thing back. So Disney paid for this law, which we refer to as the
+Mickey Mouse Copyright Act.</p>
<p>The movie companies say they want perpetual copyright, but the US
-Constitution won't let them get that officially. So they came up with a way
-to get the same result unofficially: “perpetual copyright on the
installment
-plan”. Every 20 years they extend copyright for 20 more years. So that
at any
-given time, any given work has a date when it will supposedly fall into the
-public domain. But that date is like tomorrow, it never comes. By the time
-you get there they will have postponed it, unless we stop them next time.</p>
-
-<p>That's one dimension, the dimension of duration.
-But even more important is the dimension of breadth: which uses of the work
-does copyright cover?</p>
-
-<p>In the age of the printing press, copyright wasn't
-supposed to cover all uses of a copyrighted work, because copyright
-regulated certain uses that were the exceptions in a broader space of
-unregulated uses. There were certain things you were simply allowed to do
-with your copy of a book.</p>
-
-<p>Now the publishers have got the idea that they can turn our computers
-against us, and use them to seize total power over all use of published
-works. They want to set up a pay-per-view universe. They're doing it with
-DRM (Digital Restrictions Management)—the intentional features of
software
-that's designed to restrict the user. And often the computer itself is
-designed to restrict the user.</p>
-
-<p>The first way in which the general public saw this was in DVDs. A movie on
a
-DVD was usually encrypted, and the format was secret. The DVD conspiracy
-kept this secret because they said anyone that wants to make DVD players has
-to join the conspiracy, promise to keep the format secret, and
-promise to design the DVD players to restrict the users according to the
-rules, which say it has to stop the user from doing this, from doing that,
-from doing that—a precise set of requirements, all of which are malicious
-towards us.</p>
-
-<p>It worked for a while, but then some people figured out the secret format,
-and published free software capable of reading the movie on a DVD and
-playing it. Then the publishers said “since we can't actually stop
them, we
-have to make it a crime”. And they started that in the US in 1998 with
the
-Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which imposed censorship on software
-capable of doing such jobs.</p>
-
-<p>So that particular piece of free software was the subject of a court case.
-Its distribution in the US is forbidden; the US practices censorship of
-software.</p>
-
-<p>The movie companies are well aware that they can't really make
-that program disappear—it's easy enough to find it. So they designed
-another encryption system, which they hoped would be harder to break, and
-it's called AACS, or the axe.</p>
+Constitution won't let them get that officially. So they came up with
+a way to get the same result unofficially: “perpetual copyright
+on the installment plan”. Every 20 years they extend copyright
+for 20 more years. So that at any given time, any given work has a
+date when it will supposedly fall into the public domain. But that
+date is like tomorrow, it never comes. By the time you get there they
+will have postponed it, unless we stop them next time.</p>
+
+<p>That's one dimension, the dimension of duration. But even more
+important is the dimension of breadth: which uses of the work does
+copyright cover?</p>
+
+<p>In the age of the printing press, copyright wasn't supposed to
+cover all uses of a copyrighted work, because copyright regulated
+certain uses that were the exceptions in a broader space of
+unregulated uses. There were certain things you were simply allowed
+to do with your copy of a book.</p>
+
+<p>Now the publishers have got the idea that they can turn our
+computers against us, and use them to seize total power over all use
+of published works. They want to set up a pay-per-view universe.
+They're doing it with DRM (Digital Restrictions Management)—the
+intentional features of software that's designed to restrict the user.
+And often the computer itself is designed to restrict the user.</p>
+
+<p>The first way in which the general public saw this was in DVDs. A
+movie on a DVD was usually encrypted, and the format was secret. The
+DVD conspiracy kept this secret because they said anyone that wants to
+make DVD players has to join the conspiracy, promise to keep the
+format secret, and promise to design the DVD players to restrict the
+users according to the rules, which say it has to stop the user from
+doing this, from doing that, from doing that—a precise set of
+requirements, all of which are malicious towards us.</p>
+
+<p>It worked for a while, but then some people figured out the secret
+format, and published free software capable of reading the movie on a
+DVD and playing it. Then the publishers said “since we can't
+actually stop them, we have to make it a crime”. And they
+started that in the US in 1998 with the Digital Millennium Copyright
+Act, which imposed censorship on software capable of doing such
+jobs.</p>
+
+<p>So that particular piece of free software was the subject of a
+court case. Its distribution in the US is forbidden; the US practices
+censorship of software.</p>
+
+<p>The movie companies are well aware that they can't really make that
+program disappear—it's easy enough to find it. So they designed
+another encryption system, which they hoped would be harder to break,
+and it's called AACS, or the axe.</p>
<p>The AACS conspiracy makes precise rules about all players. For
instance, in 2011 it's going to be forbidden to make analog video
outputs. So all video outputs will have to be digital, and they will
carry the signal encrypted into a monitor specially designed to keep
secrets from the user. That is malicious hardware. They say that the
-purpose of this is to “close the analog hole”. I'll show you a
couple
-of analog holes (Stallman takes off his glasses): here's one and
-here's another, that they'd like to poke out permanently.</p>
+purpose of this is to “close the analog hole”. I'll show
+you a couple of analog holes (Stallman takes off his glasses): here's
+one and here's another, that they'd like to poke out permanently.</p>
<p>How do I know about these conspiracies? The reason is they're not
-secret—they have websites. The AACS website proudly describes the
contracts
-that manufacturers have to sign, which is how I know about this requirement.
-It proudly states the names of the companies that have established this
-conspiracy, which include Microsoft and Apple, and Intel, and Sony, and
-Disney, and IBM.</p>
-
-<p>A conspiracy of companies designed to restrict the public's access to
-technology ought to be prosecuted as a serious crime, like a conspiracy to
-fix prices, except it's worse, so the prison sentences for this should be
-longer. But these companies are quite confident that our governments are on
-their side against us. They have no fear against being prosecuted for these
-conspiracies, which is why they don't bother to hide them.</p>
-
-<p>In general DRM is set up by a conspiracy of companies. Once in a while a
-single company can do it, but generally it requires a conspiracy between
-technology companies and publishers, so [it's] almost always a conspiracy.</p>
-
-<p>They thought that nobody would ever be able to break the AACS, but about
-three and a half years ago someone released a free program capable of
-decrypting that format. However, it was totally useless, because in order to
-run it you need to know the key.</p>
-
-<p>And then, six months later, I saw a photo of two adorable puppies, with 32
-hex digits above them, and I wondered: “Why put those two things
together? I
-wonder if those numbers are some important key, and someone could have put
-the numbers together with the puppies, figuring people would copy the photo
-of the puppies because they were so cute. This would protect the key from
-being wiped out.”</p>
-
-<p>And that's what it was—that was the key to break the axe. People
posted
-it, and editors deleted it, because laws in many countries now conscript
-them to censor this information. It was posted again, they deleted it;
-eventually they gave up, and in two weeks this number was posted in over
-700,000 web sites.</p>
-
-<p>That's a big outpouring of public disgust with DRM. But it didn't win the
-war, because the publishers changed the key. Not only that: with HD DVD,
-this was adequate to break the DRM, but not with Blu-ray.
-Blu-ray has an additional level of DRM and so far there is no free software
-that can break it, which means that you must regard Blu-ray disks as
-something incompatible with your own freedom. They are an enemy with which
-no accommodation is possible, at least not with our present level of
-knowledge.</p>
-
-<p>Never accept any product designed to attack your freedom. If you don't have
-the free software to play a DVD, you mustn't buy or rent any DVDs, or accept
-them even as gifts, except for the rare non-encrypted DVDs, which there are
-a few of. I actually have a few [of these]—I don't have any encrypted
DVDs,
-I won't take them.</p>
-
-<p>So this is how things stand in video, but we've also seen DRM in music.</p>
-
-<p>For instance, about ten years ago we started to see things that looked like
-compact disks, but they weren't written quite like compact disks. They
-didn't follow the standard. We called them 'corrupt disks', and the idea of
-them was that they would play in an audio player, but it was impossible to
-read them on a computer. These different methods had various problems.</p>
-
-<p>Eventually Sony came up with a clever idea. They put a program on the disk,
-so that if you stuck the disk into a computer, the disk would install the
-program. This program was designed like a virus to take control of the
-system. It's called a 'root kit', meaning that it has things in it to break
-the security of the system so that it can install the software deep inside
-the system, and modify various parts of the system.</p>
-
-<p>For instance, it modified the command you could use to examine the system to
-see if the software was present, so as to disguise itself. It modified the
-command you could use to delete some of these files, so that it wouldn't
-really delete them. Now all of this is a serious crime, but it's not the
-only one Sony committed, because the software also included free software
-code—code that had been released under the GNU General Public
License.</p>
-
-<p>Now the GNU GPL is a copyleft license, and that means it says “Yes,
you're
-free to put this code into other things, but when you do, the entire program
-that you put things into you must release as free software under the same
-license. And you must make the source code available to users, and to inform
-them of their rights you must give them a copy of this license when they get
-the software.”</p>
-
-<p>Sony didn't comply with all that. That's commercial copyright infringement,
-which is a felony. They're both felonies, but Sony wasn't prosecuted because
-the government understands that the purpose of the government and the law is
-to maintain the power of those companies over us, not to help defend our
-freedom in any way.</p>
-
-<p>People got angry and they sued Sony. However, they made a mistake. They
-focused their condemnation not on the evil purpose of this scheme, but only
-on the secondary evils of the various methods that Sony used. So Sony
-settled the lawsuits and promised that in the future, when it attacks our
-freedom, it will not do those other things.</p>
-
-<p>Actually, that particular corrupt disk scheme was not so bad, because if you
-were not using Windows it would not affect you at all. Even if you were
-using Windows, there's a key on the keyboard—if you remembered every time
-to hold it down, then the disk wouldn't install the software. But of course
-it's hard to remember that every time; you're going to slip up some day.
-This shows the kind of thing we've had to deal with.</p>
-
-<p>Fortunately music DRM is receding. Even the main record companies sell
-downloads without DRM. But we see a renewed effort to impose DRM on books.</p>
-
-<p>You see, the publishers want to take away the traditional freedoms of
-book readers—freedom to do things such as borrow a book from the
-public library, or lend it to a friend; to sell a book to a used book
-store, or buy it anonymously paying cash (which is the only way I buy
-books—we've got to resist the temptations to let Big Brother know
everything that
-we're doing.)</p>
-
-<p>Even the freedom to keep the book as long as you wish, and read it as
-many times as you wish, they plan to get rid of.</p>
-
-<p>The way they do it is with DRM. They knew that so many people read books
and
-would get angry if these freedoms were taken away that they didn't believe
-they could buy a law specifically to abolish these freedoms—there would
be
-too much opposition. Democracy is sick, but once in a while people manage to
-demand something. So they came up with a two-stage plan.</p>
-
-<p>First, take away these freedoms from ebooks, and second, convince people to
-switch from paper books to ebooks. They've succeeded with stage 1.</p>
-
-<p>In the US they did it with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and in New
-Zealand, that was part of the year-ago Copyright Act; censorship on software
-that can break DRM was part of that law. That's an unjust provision; it's
-got to be repealed.</p>
-
-<p>The second stage is convince people to switch from printed books to ebooks;
-that didn't go so well.</p>
-
-<p>One publisher in 2001 had the idea they would make their line of ebooks
-really popular if they started it with my biography. So they found an author
-and the author asked me if I'd cooperate, and I said “Only if this ebook
is
-published without encryption, without DRM”. The publisher wouldn't go
along
-with that, and I just stuck to it—I said no. Eventually we found another
-publisher who was willing to do this—in fact willing to publish the book
-under a free license giving you the four freedoms—so the book was then
-published, and sold a lot of copies on paper.</p>
-
-<p>But in any case, ebooks failed at the beginning of this decade. People just
-didn't want to read them very much. And I said, “they will try
again”. We saw
-an amazing number of news articles about electronic ink (or is it electronic
-paper, I can never remember which), and it occurred to me probably the
-reason there's so many is the publishers want us to think about this. They
-want us to be eager for the next generation of ebook readers.</p>
-
-<p>Now they're upon us. Things like the Sony Shreader (its official name is
the
-Sony Reader, but if you put on 'sh' it explains what it's designed to do to
-your books), and the Amazon Swindle, designed to swindle you out of your
-traditional freedoms without your noticing. Of course, they call it the
-Kindle which is what it's going to do to your books.</p>
-
-<p>The Kindle is an extremely malicious product, almost as malicious as
-Microsoft Windows. They both have spy features, they both have Digital
-Restrictions Management, and they both have back doors.</p>
-
-<p>In the case of the Kindle, the only way you can buy a book is to buy it from
-Amazon, and Amazon requires you to identify yourself, so they know
-everything that you've bought.</p>
-
-<p>Then there is Digital Restrictions Management, so you can't lend the book or
-sell it to a used bookstore, and the library can't lend it either.</p>
-
-<p>And then there's the back door, which we found out about about three months
-ago, because Amazon used it. Amazon sent a command to all the Kindles to
-erase a particular book, namely 1984 by George Orwell. Yes, they couldn't
-have picked a more ironic book to erase. So that's how we know that Amazon
-has a back door with which it can erase books remotely.</p>
-
-<p>What else it can do, who knows? Maybe it's like Microsoft Windows. Maybe
-Amazon can remotely upgrade the software, which means that whatever
-malicious things are not in it now, they could put them in it tomorrow.</p>
-
-<p>This is intolerable—any one of these restrictions is intolerable.
They want
-to create a world where nobody lends books to anybody anymore.</p>
-
-<p>Imagine that you visit a friend and there are no books on the shelf. It's
-not that your friend doesn't read, but his books are all inside a device,
-and of course he can't lend you those books. The only way he could lend you
-any one of those books is to lend you his whole library, which is obviously
-a ridiculous thing to ask anybody to do. So there goes friendship for people
-who love books.</p>
-
-<p>Make sure that you inform people what this device implies. It means other
-readers will no longer be your friends, because you will be acting like a
-jerk toward them. Spread the word preemptively. This device is your enemy.
-It's the enemy of everyone who reads. The people who don't recognize that
-are the people who are thinking so short-term that they don't see it. It's
-our job to help them see beyond the momentary convenience to the
-implications of this device.</p>
-
-<p>I have nothing against distributing books in digital form, if they are not
-designed to take away our freedom. Strictly speaking, it is possible to have
-an ebook reader:</p>
+secret—they have websites. The AACS website proudly describes
+the contracts that manufacturers have to sign, which is how I know
+about this requirement. It proudly states the names of the companies
+that have established this conspiracy, which include Microsoft and
+Apple, and Intel, and Sony, and Disney, and IBM.</p>
+
+<p>A conspiracy of companies designed to restrict the public's access
+to technology ought to be prosecuted as a serious crime, like a
+conspiracy to fix prices, except it's worse, so the prison sentences
+for this should be longer. But these companies are quite confident
+that our governments are on their side against us. They have no fear
+against being prosecuted for these conspiracies, which is why they
+don't bother to hide them.</p>
+
+<p>In general DRM is set up by a conspiracy of companies. Once in a
+while a single company can do it, but generally it requires a
+conspiracy between technology companies and publishers, so [it's]
+almost always a conspiracy.</p>
+
+<p>They thought that nobody would ever be able to break the AACS, but
+about three and a half years ago someone released a free program
+capable of decrypting that format. However, it was totally useless,
+because in order to run it you need to know the key.</p>
+
+<p>And then, six months later, I saw a photo of two adorable puppies,
+with 32 hex digits above them, and I wondered: “Why put those
+two things together? I wonder if those numbers are some important
+key, and someone could have put the numbers together with the puppies,
+figuring people would copy the photo of the puppies because they were
+so cute. This would protect the key from being wiped out.”</p>
+
+<p>And that's what it was—that was the key to break the axe.
+People posted it, and editors deleted it, because laws in many
+countries now conscript them to censor this information. It was
+posted again, they deleted it; eventually they gave up, and in two
+weeks this number was posted in over 700,000 web sites.</p>
+
+<p>That's a big outpouring of public disgust with DRM. But it didn't
+win the war, because the publishers changed the key. Not only that:
+with HD DVD, this was adequate to break the DRM, but not with Blu-ray.
+Blu-ray has an additional level of DRM and so far there is no free
+software that can break it, which means that you must regard Blu-ray
+disks as something incompatible with your own freedom. They are an
+enemy with which no accommodation is possible, at least not with our
+present level of knowledge.</p>
+
+<p>Never accept any product designed to attack your freedom. If you
+don't have the free software to play a DVD, you mustn't buy or rent
+any DVDs, or accept them even as gifts, except for the rare
+non-encrypted DVDs, which there are a few of. I actually have a few
+[of these]—I don't have any encrypted DVDs, I won't take
+them.</p>
+
+<p>So this is how things stand in video, but we've also seen DRM in
+music.</p>
+
+<p>For instance, about ten years ago we started to see things that
+looked like compact disks, but they weren't written quite like compact
+disks. They didn't follow the standard. We called them 'corrupt
+disks', and the idea of them was that they would play in an audio
+player, but it was impossible to read them on a computer. These
+different methods had various problems.</p>
+
+<p>Eventually Sony came up with a clever idea. They put a program on
+the disk, so that if you stuck the disk into a computer, the disk
+would install the program. This program was designed like a virus to
+take control of the system. It's called a 'root kit', meaning that it
+has things in it to break the security of the system so that it can
+install the software deep inside the system, and modify various parts
+of the system.</p>
+
+<p>For instance, it modified the command you could use to examine the
+system to see if the software was present, so as to disguise itself.
+It modified the command you could use to delete some of these files,
+so that it wouldn't really delete them. Now all of this is a serious
+crime, but it's not the only one Sony committed, because the software
+also included free software code—code that had been released
+under the GNU General Public License.</p>
+
+<p>Now the GNU GPL is a copyleft license, and that means it says
+“Yes, you're free to put this code into other things, but when
+you do, the entire program that you put things into you must release
+as free software under the same license. And you must make the source
+code available to users, and to inform them of their rights you must
+give them a copy of this license when they get the
+software.”</p>
+
+<p>Sony didn't comply with all that. That's commercial copyright
+infringement, which is a felony. They're both felonies, but Sony
+wasn't prosecuted because the government understands that the purpose
+of the government and the law is to maintain the power of those
+companies over us, not to help defend our freedom in any way.</p>
+
+<p>People got angry and they sued Sony. However, they made a mistake.
+They focused their condemnation not on the evil purpose of this
+scheme, but only on the secondary evils of the various methods that
+Sony used. So Sony settled the lawsuits and promised that in the
+future, when it attacks our freedom, it will not do those other
+things.</p>
+
+<p>Actually, that particular corrupt disk scheme was not so bad,
+because if you were not using Windows it would not affect you at all.
+Even if you were using Windows, there's a key on the keyboard—if
+you remembered every time to hold it down, then the disk wouldn't
+install the software. But of course it's hard to remember that every
+time; you're going to slip up some day. This shows the kind of thing
+we've had to deal with.</p>
+
+<p>Fortunately music DRM is receding. Even the main record companies
+sell downloads without DRM. But we see a renewed effort to impose DRM
+on books.</p>
+
+<p>You see, the publishers want to take away the traditional freedoms
+of book readers—freedom to do things such as borrow a book from
+the public library, or lend it to a friend; to sell a book to a used
+book store, or buy it anonymously paying cash (which is the only way I
+buy books—we've got to resist the temptations to let Big Brother
+know everything that we're doing.)</p>
+
+<p>Even the freedom to keep the book as long as you wish, and read it
+as many times as you wish, they plan to get rid of.</p>
+
+<p>The way they do it is with DRM. They knew that so many people read
+books and would get angry if these freedoms were taken away that they
+didn't believe they could buy a law specifically to abolish these
+freedoms—there would be too much opposition. Democracy is sick,
+but once in a while people manage to demand something. So they came
+up with a two-stage plan.</p>
+
+<p>First, take away these freedoms from ebooks, and second, convince
+people to switch from paper books to ebooks. They've succeeded with
+stage 1.</p>
+
+<p>In the US they did it with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act,
+and in New Zealand, that was part of the year-ago Copyright Act;
+censorship on software that can break DRM was part of that law.
+That's an unjust provision; it's got to be repealed.</p>
+
+<p>The second stage is convince people to switch from printed books to
+ebooks; that didn't go so well.</p>
+
+<p>One publisher in 2001 had the idea they would make their line of
+ebooks really popular if they started it with my biography. So they
+found an author and the author asked me if I'd cooperate, and I said
+“Only if this ebook is published without encryption, without
+DRM”. The publisher wouldn't go along with that, and I just
+stuck to it—I said no. Eventually we found another publisher
+who was willing to do this—in fact willing to publish the book
+under a free license giving you the four freedoms—so the book
+was then published, and sold a lot of copies on paper.</p>
+
+<p>But in any case, ebooks failed at the beginning of this decade.
+People just didn't want to read them very much. And I said,
+“they will try again”. We saw an amazing number of news
+articles about electronic ink (or is it electronic paper, I can never
+remember which), and it occurred to me probably the reason there's so
+many is the publishers want us to think about this. They want us to
+be eager for the next generation of ebook readers.</p>
+
+<p>Now they're upon us. Things like the Sony Shreader (its official
+name is the Sony Reader, but if you put on 'sh' it explains what it's
+designed to do to your books), and the Amazon Swindle, designed to
+swindle you out of your traditional freedoms without your noticing.
+Of course, they call it the Kindle which is what it's going to do to
+your books.</p>
+
+<p>The Kindle is an extremely malicious product, almost as malicious
+as Microsoft Windows. They both have spy features, they both have
+Digital Restrictions Management, and they both have back doors.</p>
+
+<p>In the case of the Kindle, the only way you can buy a book is to
+buy it from Amazon, and Amazon requires you to identify yourself, so
+they know everything that you've bought.</p>
+
+<p>Then there is Digital Restrictions Management, so you can't lend
+the book or sell it to a used bookstore, and the library can't lend it
+either.</p>
+
+<p>And then there's the back door, which we found out about about
+three months ago, because Amazon used it. Amazon sent a command to
+all the Kindles to erase a particular book, namely 1984 by George
+Orwell. Yes, they couldn't have picked a more ironic book to erase.
+So that's how we know that Amazon has a back door with which it can
+erase books remotely.</p>
+
+<p>What else it can do, who knows? Maybe it's like Microsoft Windows.
+Maybe Amazon can remotely upgrade the software, which means that
+whatever malicious things are not in it now, they could put them in it
+tomorrow.</p>
+
+<p>This is intolerable—any one of these restrictions is
+intolerable. They want to create a world where nobody lends books to
+anybody anymore.</p>
+
+<p>Imagine that you visit a friend and there are no books on the
+shelf. It's not that your friend doesn't read, but his books are all
+inside a device, and of course he can't lend you those books. The
+only way he could lend you any one of those books is to lend you his
+whole library, which is obviously a ridiculous thing to ask anybody to
+do. So there goes friendship for people who love books.</p>
+
+<p>Make sure that you inform people what this device implies. It
+means other readers will no longer be your friends, because you will
+be acting like a jerk toward them. Spread the word preemptively.
+This device is your enemy. It's the enemy of everyone who reads. The
+people who don't recognize that are the people who are thinking so
+short-term that they don't see it. It's our job to help them see
+beyond the momentary convenience to the implications of this
+device.</p>
+
+<p>I have nothing against distributing books in digital form, if they
+are not designed to take away our freedom. Strictly speaking, it is
+possible to have an ebook reader:</p>
<ul>
<li>that is not designed to attack you,</li>
@@ -561,58 +609,63 @@
<li>which doesn't have a back door, [and]</li>
-<li>which doesn't restrict what you can do with the files on your machine.</li>
+<li>which doesn't restrict what you can do with the files on your
+machine.</li>
</ul>
-<p>It's possible, but the big companies really pushing ebooks are doing it to
-attack our freedom, and we mustn't stand for that. This is what governments
-are doing in cahoots with big business to attack our freedom, by making
-copyright harsher and nastier, more restrictive than ever before.</p>
-
-<p>But what should they do? Governments should make copyright power less.
Here
-are my specific proposals.</p>
-
-<p>First of all, there is the dimension of time. I propose copyright should
-last ten years, starting from the date of publication of a work.</p>
-
-<p>Why from the date of publication? Because before that, we
-don't have copies. It doesn't matter to us whether we would have been
-allowed to copy our copies that we don't have, so I figure we might as well
-let the authors have as much time as it takes to arrange publication, and
-then start the clock.</p>
-
-<p>But why ten years? I don't know about in this country, but in the US, the
-publication cycle has got shorter and shorter. Nowadays almost all books are
-remaindered within two years and out-of-print within three. So ten years is
-more than three times the usual publication cycle—that should be plenty
-comfortable.</p>
-
-<p>But not everybody agrees. I once proposed this in a panel discussion with
-fiction writers, and the award-winning fantasy writer next to me said
“Ten
-years? No way. Anything more than five years is intolerable.” You
see, he
-had a legal dispute with his publisher. His books seemed to be out of print,
-but the publisher wouldn't admit it. The publisher was using the copyright
-on his own book to stop him from distributing copies himself, which he
-wanted to do so people could read it.</p>
-
-<p>This is what every artist starts out wanting—wanting to distribute
her work
-so it will get read and appreciated. Very few make a lot of money. That tiny
-fraction face the danger of being morally corrupted, like J.K. Rowling.</p>
-
-<p>J.K. Rowling, in Canada, got an injunction against people who had bought her
-book in a bookstore, ordering them not to read it. So in response I call for
-a boycott of Harry Potter books. But I don't say you shouldn't read them; I
-leave that to the author and the publisher. I just say you shouldn't buy
-them.</p>
-
-<p>It's few authors that make enough money that they can be corrupted in
-this way. Most of them don't get anywhere near that, and continue wanting the
-same thing they wanted at the outset: they want their work to be
-appreciated.</p>
-
-<p>He wanted to distribute his own book, and copyright was stopping him. He
-realized that more than five years of copyright was unlikely to ever do him
-any good.</p>
+<p>It's possible, but the big companies really pushing ebooks are
+doing it to attack our freedom, and we mustn't stand for that. This
+is what governments are doing in cahoots with big business to attack
+our freedom, by making copyright harsher and nastier, more restrictive
+than ever before.</p>
+
+<p>But what should they do? Governments should make copyright power
+less. Here are my specific proposals.</p>
+
+<p>First of all, there is the dimension of time. I propose copyright
+should last ten years, starting from the date of publication of a
+work.</p>
+
+<p>Why from the date of publication? Because before that, we don't
+have copies. It doesn't matter to us whether we would have been
+allowed to copy our copies that we don't have, so I figure we might as
+well let the authors have as much time as it takes to arrange
+publication, and then start the clock.</p>
+
+<p>But why ten years? I don't know about in this country, but in the
+US, the publication cycle has got shorter and shorter. Nowadays
+almost all books are remaindered within two years and out-of-print
+within three. So ten years is more than three times the usual
+publication cycle—that should be plenty comfortable.</p>
+
+<p>But not everybody agrees. I once proposed this in a panel
+discussion with fiction writers, and the award-winning fantasy writer
+next to me said “Ten years? No way. Anything more than five
+years is intolerable.” You see, he had a legal dispute with his
+publisher. His books seemed to be out of print, but the publisher
+wouldn't admit it. The publisher was using the copyright on his own
+book to stop him from distributing copies himself, which he wanted to
+do so people could read it.</p>
+
+<p>This is what every artist starts out wanting—wanting to
+distribute her work so it will get read and appreciated. Very few
+make a lot of money. That tiny fraction face the danger of being
+morally corrupted, like J.K. Rowling.</p>
+
+<p>J.K. Rowling, in Canada, got an injunction against people who had
+bought her book in a bookstore, ordering them not to read it. So in
+response I call for a boycott of Harry Potter books. But I don't say
+you shouldn't read them; I leave that to the author and the publisher.
+I just say you shouldn't buy them.</p>
+
+<p>It's few authors that make enough money that they can be corrupted
+in this way. Most of them don't get anywhere near that, and continue
+wanting the same thing they wanted at the outset: they want their work
+to be appreciated.</p>
+
+<p>He wanted to distribute his own book, and copyright was stopping
+him. He realized that more than five years of copyright was unlikely
+to ever do him any good.</p>
<p>If people would rather have copyright last five years, I won't be
against it. I propose ten as a first stab at the problem. Let's
@@ -620,89 +673,92 @@
adjust it after that. I don't say I think ten years is the exact
right number—I don't know.</p>
-<p>What about the dimension of breadth? Which activities should copyright
-cover? I distinguish three broad categories of works.</p>
+<p>What about the dimension of breadth? Which activities should
+copyright cover? I distinguish three broad categories of works.</p>
-<p>First of all, there are the functional works that you use to do a practical
-job in your life. This includes software, recipes, educational works,
-reference works, text fonts, and other things you can think of. These works
-should be free.</p>
-
-<p>If you use the work to do a job in your life, then if you can't change the
-work to suit you, you don't control your life. Once you have changed the
-work to suit you, then you've got to be free to publish it—publish your
-version—because there will be others who will want the changes you've
made.</p>
-
-<p>This leads quickly to the conclusion that users have to have the same
-four freedoms [for all functional works], not just for software. And
-you'll notice that for recipes, practically speaking, cooks are always
-sharing and changing recipes just as if the recipes were free.
+<p>First of all, there are the functional works that you use to do a
+practical job in your life. This includes software, recipes,
+educational works, reference works, text fonts, and other things you
+can think of. These works should be free.</p>
+
+<p>If you use the work to do a job in your life, then if you can't
+change the work to suit you, you don't control your life. Once you
+have changed the work to suit you, then you've got to be free to
+publish it—publish your version—because there will be
+others who will want the changes you've made.</p>
+
+<p>This leads quickly to the conclusion that users have to have the
+same four freedoms [for all functional works], not just for software.
+And you'll notice that for recipes, practically speaking, cooks are
+always sharing and changing recipes just as if the recipes were free.
Imagine how people would react if the government tried to stamp out
-so-called 'recipe piracy'.</p>
+so-called “recipe piracy”.</p>
-<p>The term 'pirate' is pure propaganda. When people ask me what I think
-of music piracy, I say “As far as I know, when pirates attack they
-don't do it by playing instruments badly, they do it with arms. So
-it's not music 'piracy', because piracy is attacking ships, and
-sharing is as far as you get from being the moral equivalent of
-attacking ships”. Attacking ships is bad, sharing with other people
-is good, so we should firmly denounce that propaganda term 'piracy'
-whenever we hear it.</p>
-
-<p>People might have objected twenty years ago: “If we don't give up our
-freedom, if we don't let the publishers of these works control us, the
-works won't get made and that will be a horrible disaster.” Now,
-looking at the free software community, and all the recipes that
-circulate, and reference works like Wikipedia—we are even starting to
-see free textbooks being published—we know that that fear is
-misguided.</p>
-
-<p>There is no need to despair and give up our freedom thinking that otherwise
-the works won't get made. There are lots of ways to encourage them to get
-made if we want more—lots of ways that are consistent with and respect
our
-freedom. In this category, they should all be free.</p>
-
-<p>But what about the second category, of works that say what certain people
-thought, like memoirs, essays of opinion, scientific papers, and various
-other things? To publish a modified version of somebody else's statement of
-what he thought is misrepresenting [that] somebody. That's not particularly
-a contribution to society.</p>
-
-<p>Therefore it is workable and acceptable to have a somewhat reduced copyright
-system where all commercial use is covered by copyright, all modification is
-covered by copyright, but everyone is free to non-commercially redistribute
-exact copies.</p>
+<p>The term “pirate” is pure propaganda. When people ask
+me what I think of music piracy, I say “As far as I know, when
+pirates attack they don't do it by playing instruments badly, they do
+it with arms. So it's not music “piracy”, because piracy
+is attacking ships, and sharing is as far as you get from being the
+moral equivalent of attacking ships”. Attacking ships is bad,
+sharing with other people is good, so we should firmly denounce that
+propaganda term “piracy” whenever we hear it.</p>
+
+<p>People might have objected twenty years ago: “If we don't
+give up our freedom, if we don't let the publishers of these works
+control us, the works won't get made and that will be a horrible
+disaster.” Now, looking at the free software community, and all
+the recipes that circulate, and reference works like
+Wikipedia—we are even starting to see free textbooks being
+published—we know that that fear is misguided.</p>
+
+<p>There is no need to despair and give up our freedom thinking that
+otherwise the works won't get made. There are lots of ways to
+encourage them to get made if we want more—lots of ways that are
+consistent with and respect our freedom. In this category, they
+should all be free.</p>
+
+<p>But what about the second category, of works that say what certain
+people thought, like memoirs, essays of opinion, scientific papers,
+and various other things? To publish a modified version of somebody
+else's statement of what he thought is misrepresenting [that]
+somebody. That's not particularly a contribution to society.</p>
+
+<p>Therefore it is workable and acceptable to have a somewhat reduced
+copyright system where all commercial use is covered by copyright, all
+modification is covered by copyright, but everyone is free to
+non-commercially redistribute exact copies.</p>
<p>That freedom is the minimum freedom we must establish for all
published works, because the denial of that freedom is what creates
-the War on Sharing—what creates the vicious propaganda that sharing
-is theft, that sharing is like being a pirate and attacking ships.
-Absurdities, but absurdities backed by a lot of money that has
+the War on Sharing—what creates the vicious propaganda that
+sharing is theft, that sharing is like being a pirate and attacking
+ships. Absurdities, but absurdities backed by a lot of money that has
corrupted our governments. We need to end the War on Sharing; we need
to legalize sharing exact copies of any published work.</p>
-<p>In the second category of works, that's all we need; we don't need to make
-them free. Therefore I think it's OK to have a reduced copyright system
-which covers commercial use and all modifications. And this will provide a
-revenue stream to the authors in more or less the same (usually inadequate)
-way as the present system. You've got to keep in mind [that] the present
-system, except for superstars, is usually totally inadequate.</p>
-
-<p>What about works of art and entertainment? Here it took me a while to
decide
-what to think about modifications.</p>
-
-<p>You see, on one hand, a work of art can have an artistic integrity and
-modifying it could destroy that. Of course, copyright doesn't necessarily
-stop works from being butchered that way. Hollywood does it all the time. On
-the other hand, modifying the work can be a contribution to art. It makes
-possible the folk process which leads to things which are beautiful and
-rich.</p>
-
-<p>Even if we look at named authors only: consider Shakespeare, who borrowed
-stories from other works only a few decades old, and did them in different
-ways, and made important works of literature. If today's copyright law had
-existed then, that would have been forbidden and those plays wouldn't have
-been written.</p>
+<p>In the second category of works, that's all we need; we don't need
+to make them free. Therefore I think it's OK to have a reduced
+copyright system which covers commercial use and all modifications.
+And this will provide a revenue stream to the authors in more or less
+the same (usually inadequate) way as the present system. You've got
+to keep in mind [that] the present system, except for superstars, is
+usually totally inadequate.</p>
+
+<p>What about works of art and entertainment? Here it took me a while
+to decide what to think about modifications.</p>
+
+<p>You see, on one hand, a work of art can have an artistic integrity
+and modifying it could destroy that. Of course, copyright doesn't
+necessarily stop works from being butchered that way. Hollywood does
+it all the time. On the other hand, modifying the work can be a
+contribution to art. It makes possible the folk process which leads
+to things which are beautiful and rich.</p>
+
+<p>Even if we look at named authors only: consider Shakespeare, who
+borrowed stories from other works only a few decades old, and did them
+in different ways, and made important works of literature. If today's
+copyright law had existed then, that would have been forbidden and
+those plays wouldn't have been written.</p>
<p>But eventually I realized that modifying a work of art can be a
contribution to art, but it's not desperately urgent in most cases.
@@ -713,116 +769,128 @@
hundred years after the author dies. This is insane, but ten years,
as I've proposed copyright should last, that people can wait.</p>
-<p>So I propose the same partly reduced copyright that covers commercial use
-and modification, but everyone's got to be free to non-commercially
-redistribute exact copies. After ten years it goes into the public domain,
-and people can contribute to art by publishing their modified versions.</p>
-
-<p>One other thing: if you're going to take little pieces out of a bunch of
-works and rearrange them into something totally different, that should just
-be legal, because the purpose of copyright is to promote art, not to
-obstruct art. It's stupid to apply copyright to using snippets like
-that—it's self-defeating. It's a kind of distortion that you'd only get
-when the government is under the control of the publishers of the existing
-successful works, and has totally lost sight of its intended purpose.</p>
-
-<p>That's what I propose, and in particular, this means that sharing copies on
-the Internet must be legal. Sharing is good. Sharing builds the bonds of
-society. To attack sharing is to attack society.</p>
-
-<p>So any time the government proposes some new means to attack people who
-share, to stop them from sharing, we have to recognize that this is evil,
-not just because the means proposed almost invariably offend basic ideas of
-justice (but that's not a coincidence). The reason is because the purpose is
-evil. Sharing is good and the government should encourage sharing.</p>
-
-<p>But copyright did after all have a useful purpose. Copyright as a means to
-carry out that purpose has a problem now, because it doesn't fit in with the
-technology we use. It interferes with all the vital freedoms for all the
-readers, listeners, viewers, and whatever, but the goal of promoting the
-arts is still desirable. So in addition to the partly reduced copyright
-system, which would continue to be a copyright system, I propose two other
-methods.</p>
-
-<p>One is taxes—distribute tax money directly to artists. This could be
a
-special tax, perhaps on Internet connectivity, or it could come from general
-revenue, because it won't be that much money in total, not if it's
-distributed in an efficient way. To distribute it efficiently to promote the
-arts means not in linear proportion to popularity. It should be based on
-popularity, because we don't want bureaucrats to have the discretion to
-decide which artists to support and which to ignore, but based on popularity
-does not imply linear proportion.</p>
-
-<p>What I propose is measure the popularity of the various artists, which you
-could do through polling (samples) in which nobody is required to
-participate, and then take the cube root. The cube root looks like this: it
-means basically that [the payment] tapers off after a while.</p>
-
-<p>If superstar A is a thousand times as popular as successful artist B, with
-this system A would get ten times as much money as B, not a thousand times.</p>
-
-<p>Linearly would give A a thousand times as much as B, which means that
-if we wanted B to get enough to live on we're going to have to make A
-tremendously rich. This is wasteful use of the tax money—it
-shouldn't be done.</p>
+<p>So I propose the same partly reduced copyright that covers
+commercial use and modification, but everyone's got to be free to
+non-commercially redistribute exact copies. After ten years it goes
+into the public domain, and people can contribute to art by publishing
+their modified versions.</p>
+
+<p>One other thing: if you're going to take little pieces out of a
+bunch of works and rearrange them into something totally different,
+that should just be legal, because the purpose of copyright is to
+promote art, not to obstruct art. It's stupid to apply copyright to
+using snippets like that—it's self-defeating. It's a kind of
+distortion that you'd only get when the government is under the
+control of the publishers of the existing successful works, and has
+totally lost sight of its intended purpose.</p>
+
+<p>That's what I propose, and in particular, this means that sharing
+copies on the Internet must be legal. Sharing is good. Sharing
+builds the bonds of society. To attack sharing is to attack
+society.</p>
+
+<p>So any time the government proposes some new means to attack people
+who share, to stop them from sharing, we have to recognize that this
+is evil, not just because the means proposed almost invariably offend
+basic ideas of justice (but that's not a coincidence). The reason is
+because the purpose is evil. Sharing is good and the government
+should encourage sharing.</p>
+
+<p>But copyright did after all have a useful purpose. Copyright as a
+means to carry out that purpose has a problem now, because it doesn't
+fit in with the technology we use. It interferes with all the vital
+freedoms for all the readers, listeners, viewers, and whatever, but
+the goal of promoting the arts is still desirable. So in addition to
+the partly reduced copyright system, which would continue to be a
+copyright system, I propose two other methods.</p>
+
+<p>One is taxes—distribute tax money directly to artists. This
+could be a special tax, perhaps on Internet connectivity, or it could
+come from general revenue, because it won't be that much money in
+total, not if it's distributed in an efficient way. To distribute it
+efficiently to promote the arts means not in linear proportion to
+popularity. It should be based on popularity, because we don't want
+bureaucrats to have the discretion to decide which artists to support
+and which to ignore, but based on popularity does not imply linear
+proportion.</p>
+
+<p>What I propose is measure the popularity of the various artists,
+which you could do through polling (samples) in which nobody is
+required to participate, and then take the cube root. The cube root
+looks like this: it means basically that [the payment] tapers off
+after a while.</p>
+
+<p>If superstar A is a thousand times as popular as successful artist
+B, with this system A would get ten times as much money as B, not a
+thousand times.</p>
+
+<p>Linearly would give A a thousand times as much as B, which means
+that if we wanted B to get enough to live on we're going to have to
+make A tremendously rich. This is wasteful use of the tax
+money—it shouldn't be done.</p>
<p>But if we make it taper off, then yes, each superstar will get
handsomely more than an ordinary successful artist, but the total of
all the superstars will be a small fraction of the [total] money.
-Most of the money will go to support a large number of fairly successful
-artists, fairly appreciated artists, fairly popular artists. Thus the system
-will use money a lot more efficiently than the existing system.</p>
-
-<p>The existing system is regressive. It actually gives far, far more per
-record, for instance, to a superstar than to anybody else. The money is
-extremely badly used. The result is we'd actually be paying a lot less this
-way. I hope that's enough to mollify some of these people who have a
-knee-jerk hostile reaction to taxes—one that I don't share, because I
-believe in a welfare state.</p>
-
-<p>I have another suggestion which is voluntary payments. Suppose every player
-had a button you could push to send a dollar to the artist who made the work
-you're currently playing or the last one you played. This money would be
-delivered anonymously to those artists. I think a lot of people would push
-that button fairly often.</p>
-
-<p>For instance, all of us could afford to push that button once every day, and
-we wouldn't miss that much money. It's not that much money for us, I'm
-pretty sure. Of course, there are poor people who couldn't afford to push it
-ever, and it's OK if they don't. We don't need to squeeze money out of poor
-people to support the artists. There are enough people who are not poor to
-do the job just fine. I'm sure you're aware that a lot of people really love
-certain art and are really happy to support the artists.</p>
-
-<p>An idea just came to me. The player could also give you a certificate of
-having supported so-and-so, and it could even count up how many times you
-had done it and give you a certificate that says “I sent so much to these
-artists”. There are various ways we could encourage people who want to
do
-it.</p>
-
-<p>For instance, we could have a PR campaign which is friendly and kind:
“Have
-you sent a dollar to some artists today? Why not? It's only a
dollar—you'll
-never miss it and don't you love what they're doing? Push the button!”
It
-will make people feel good, and they'll think “Yeah, I love what I just
-watched. I'll send a dollar.”</p>
-
-<p>This is already starting to work to some extent. There's a Canadian singer
-who used to be called Jane Siberry. She put her music on her website and
-invited people to download it and pay whatever amount they wished. She
-reported getting an average of more than a dollar per copy, which is
-interesting because the major record companies charge just under a dollar
-per copy. By letting people decide whether and how much to pay, she got
-more—she got even more per visitor who was actually downloading
something.
-But this might not even count whether there was an effect of bringing more
-people to come, and [thus] increasing the total number that this average was
-against.</p>
-
-<p>So it can work, but it's a pain in the neck under present circumstances.
-You've got to have a credit card to do it, and that means you can't do it
-anonymously. And you've got to go find where you're going to pay, and the
-payment systems for small amounts, they're not very efficient, so the
-artists are only getting half of it. If we set up a good system for this, it
-would work far, far better.</p>
+Most of the money will go to support a large number of fairly
+successful artists, fairly appreciated artists, fairly popular
+artists. Thus the system will use money a lot more efficiently than
+the existing system.</p>
+
+<p>The existing system is regressive. It actually gives far, far more
+per record, for instance, to a superstar than to anybody else. The
+money is extremely badly used. The result is we'd actually be paying
+a lot less this way. I hope that's enough to mollify some of these
+people who have a knee-jerk hostile reaction to taxes—one that I
+don't share, because I believe in a welfare state.</p>
+
+<p>I have another suggestion which is voluntary payments. Suppose
+every player had a button you could push to send a dollar to the
+artist who made the work you're currently playing or the last one you
+played. This money would be delivered anonymously to those artists.
+I think a lot of people would push that button fairly often.</p>
+
+<p>For instance, all of us could afford to push that button once every
+day, and we wouldn't miss that much money. It's not that much money
+for us, I'm pretty sure. Of course, there are poor people who
+couldn't afford to push it ever, and it's OK if they don't. We don't
+need to squeeze money out of poor people to support the artists.
+There are enough people who are not poor to do the job just fine. I'm
+sure you're aware that a lot of people really love certain art and are
+really happy to support the artists.</p>
+
+<p>An idea just came to me. The player could also give you a
+certificate of having supported so-and-so, and it could even count up
+how many times you had done it and give you a certificate that says
+“I sent so much to these artists”. There are various ways
+we could encourage people who want to do it.</p>
+
+<p>For instance, we could have a PR campaign which is friendly and
+kind: “Have you sent a dollar to some artists today? Why not?
+It's only a dollar—you'll never miss it and don't you love what
+they're doing? Push the button!” It will make people feel good,
+and they'll think “Yeah, I love what I just watched. I'll send
+a dollar.”</p>
+
+<p>This is already starting to work to some extent. There's a
+Canadian singer who used to be called Jane Siberry. She put her music
+on her website and invited people to download it and pay whatever
+amount they wished. She reported getting an average of more than a
+dollar per copy, which is interesting because the major record
+companies charge just under a dollar per copy. By letting people
+decide whether and how much to pay, she got more—she got even
+more per visitor who was actually downloading something. But this
+might not even count whether there was an effect of bringing more
+people to come, and [thus] increasing the total number that this
+average was against.</p>
+
+<p>So it can work, but it's a pain in the neck under present
+circumstances. You've got to have a credit card to do it, and that
+means you can't do it anonymously. And you've got to go find where
+you're going to pay, and the payment systems for small amounts,
+they're not very efficient, so the artists are only getting half of
+it. If we set up a good system for this, it would work far, far
+better.</p>
<p>So these are my two suggestions.</p>
@@ -831,20 +899,22 @@
to fit in with existing legal systems better to make it easier to
enact.</p>
-<p>Be careful of proposals to “compensate the rights holders”,
because when
-they say 'compensate', they're trying to presume that if you have
-appreciated a work, you now have a specific debt to somebody, and that you
-have to “compensate” that somebody. When they say 'rights
holders', it's
-supposed to make you think it's supporting artists while in fact it's going
-to the publishers—the same publishers who basically exploit all the
artists
-(except the few that you've all heard of, who are so popular that they have
-clout).</p>
-
-<p>We don't owe a debt; we have nobody that we have to
“compensate”.
-[But] supporting the arts is still a useful thing to do. That was the
-motivation for copyright back when copyright fit in with the
-technology of the day. Today copyright is a bad way to do it, but
-it's still good to do it other ways that respect our freedom.</p>
+<p>Be careful of proposals to “compensate the rights
+holders”, because when they say “compensate”,
+they're trying to presume that if you have appreciated a work, you now
+have a specific debt to somebody, and that you have to
+“compensate” that somebody. When they say “rights
+holders”, it's supposed to make you think it's supporting
+artists while in fact it's going to the publishers—the same
+publishers who basically exploit all the artists (except the few that
+you've all heard of, who are so popular that they have clout).</p>
+
+<p>We don't owe a debt; we have nobody that we have to
+“compensate”. [But] supporting the arts is still a useful
+thing to do. That was the motivation for copyright back when
+copyright fit in with the technology of the day. Today copyright is a
+bad way to do it, but it's still good to do it other ways that respect
+our freedom.</p>
<p>Demand that they change the two evil parts of the New Zealand Copyright Act.
They shouldn't replace the three strikes punishment, because sharing is
@@ -865,12 +935,11 @@
<p>
Please send FSF & GNU inquiries to
-<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
-There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
-the FSF.
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>. There are
+also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> the FSF.
<br />
-Please send broken links and other corrections (or suggestions) to
-<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
+Please send broken links and other corrections or suggestions to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>.
</p>
<p>
@@ -881,9 +950,8 @@
</p>
<p>
-Copyright © 2001, 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
+Copyright © 2001, 2007, 2009 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
</p>
-<address>51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110, USA</address>
<p>Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is
permitted in any medium, provided this notice is preserved.
</p>
@@ -891,7 +959,7 @@
<p>
Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2009/12/01 20:32:33 $
+$Date: 2009/12/02 15:16:39 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
@@ -899,22 +967,26 @@
<div id="translations">
<h4>Translations of this page</h4>
-<!-- Please keep this list alphabetical. -->
-<!-- Comment what the language is for each type, i.e. de is Deutsch.-->
-<!-- If you add a new language here, please -->
-<!-- advise address@hidden and add it to -->
-<!-- - /home/www/bin/nightly-vars either TAGSLANG or WEBLANG -->
-<!-- - /home/www/html/server/standards/README.translations.html -->
-<!-- - one of the lists under the section "Translations Underway" -->
-<!-- - if there is a translation team, you also have to add an alias -->
-<!-- to mail.gnu.org:/com/mailer/aliases -->
-<!-- Please also check you have the 2 letter language code right versus -->
-<!-- <URL:http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ert/iso639.htm> -->
-<!-- Please use W3C normative character entities -->
+<!-- Please keep this list alphabetical by language code.
+ Comment what the language is for each type, i.e. de is German.
+ Write the language name in its own language (Deutsch) in the text.
+ If you add a new language here, please
+ advise address@hidden and add it to
+ - /home/www/html/server/standards/README.translations.html
+ - one of the lists under the section "Translations Underway"
+ - if there is a translation team, you also have to add an alias
+ to mail.gnu.org:/com/mailer/aliases
+ Please also check you have the language code right; see:
+ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
+ If the 2-letter ISO 639-1 code is not available,
+ use the 3-letter ISO 639-2.
+ Please use W3C normative character entities. -->
<ul class="translations-list">
<!-- English -->
<li><a
href="/philosophy/copyright-versus-community.html">English</a> [en]</li>
+<!-- French -->
+<li><a
href="/philosophy/copyright-versus-community.fr.html">français</a> [fr]</li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
Index: po/copyright-versus-community-2000.fr.po
===================================================================
RCS file: po/copyright-versus-community-2000.fr.po
diff -N po/copyright-versus-community-2000.fr.po
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/copyright-versus-community-2000.fr.po 2 Dec 2009 15:16:49 -0000
1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,3849 @@
+# French translation of
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/copyright-versus-community-2000.html
+# Copyright (C) 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+# This file is distributed under the same license as the
copyright-versus-community.html package.
+# Miluz.
+# Cédric Corazza <cedric.corazza AT wanadoo.fr>, 2008.
+#
+msgid ""
+msgstr ""
+"Project-Id-Version: copyright-versus-community-2000.html\n"
+"POT-Creation-Date: 2009-12-01 16:26-0500\n"
+"PO-Revision-Date: 2009-12-02 16:39+0200\n"
+"Last-Translator: Cédric Corazza <cedric.corazza AT wanadoo.fr>\n"
+"Language-Team: French <address@hidden>\n"
+"MIME-Version: 1.0\n"
+"Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8\n"
+"Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\n"
+
+# type: Content of: <title>
+msgid ""
+"Copyright versus Community in the Age of Computer Networks - GNU Project - "
+"Free Software Foundation (FSF)"
+msgstr ""
+"Copyright contre Communauté à l'âge des réseaux "
+"informatiques - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation (FSF)"
+
+# type: Content of: <h2>
+msgid "Copyright versus Community in the Age of Computer Networks"
+msgstr ""
+"Copyright contre Communauté à l'âge des réseaux "
+"informatiques"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+msgid ""
+"<b>Keynote speech at LIANZA conference, Christchurch Convention Centre, 12 "
+"October 2009</b>"
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dt>
+msgid "BC:"
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Tena koutou, tena koutou, tena koutou katoa. Today I have the privilege of "
+"introducing Richard Stallman, whose keynote speech is being sponsored by the "
+"School of Information Management at Victoria University of Wellington."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Richard has been working to promote software freedom for over 25 years. In "
+"1983 he started the GNU project to develop a free operating system [the GNU "
+"system], and in 1985 he set up the Free Software Foundation. Every time you "
+"read or send a message to nz-libs, you use the Mailman software which is "
+"part of the GNU project. So whether you realize it or not, Richard's work "
+"has touched all of your lives."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"I like to describe him as the most influential person most people have never "
+"heard of, although he tells me that that cannot possibly be true because it "
+"cannot be tested."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dt>
+msgid "RMS:"
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd>
+msgid "We can't tell."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"I said that—I still like it. His ideas about software freedom and "
+"free access to information were used by Tim Berners-Lee when he created the "
+"world's first web server, and in 1999 his musings about a free online "
+"encyclopedia inspired Jimmy Wales to set up what is now Wikipedia."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Today Richard will be talking to us about copyright vs community in the age "
+"of computer networks, and their implications for libraries. Richard."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"I've been in New Zealand for a couple of weeks, and in the North Island it "
+"was raining most of the time. Now I know why they call gumboots “"
+"Wellingtons”. And then I saw somebody who was making chairs and "
+"tables out of ponga wood, and he called it fern-iture. Then we took the "
+"ferry to get here, and as soon as we got off, people started mocking and "
+"insulting us; but there were no hard feelings, they just wanted to make us "
+"really feel Picton."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"The reason people usually invite me to give speeches is because of my work "
+"on free software. This is not a talk about free software; this talk answers "
+"the question whether the ideas of free software extend to other kinds of "
+"works. But in order for that to make sense, I'd better tell you briefly "
+"what free software means."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Free software is a matter of freedom, not price, so think of “free "
+"speech”, not “free beer”. Free software is software that "
+"respects the user's freedom, and there are four specific freedoms that the "
+"user deserves always to have."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><ul><li>
+msgid "Freedom 0 is the freedom to run the program as you wish."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><ul><li>
+msgid ""
+"Freedom 1 is the freedom to study the source code of the program and change "
+"it to make the program do what you wish."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><ul><li>
+msgid ""
+"Freedom 2 is the freedom to help your neighbour; that is, the freedom to "
+"redistribute copies of the program, exact copies when you wish."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><ul><li>
+msgid ""
+"And Freedom 3 is the freedom to contribute to your community. That's the "
+"freedom to publish your modified versions when you wish."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"If the program gives you these four freedoms then it's free software, which "
+"means the social system of its distribution and use is an ethical system, "
+"one which respects the user's freedom and the social solidarity of the "
+"user's community. But if one of these freedoms is missing or insufficient, "
+"then it's proprietary software, nonfree software, user-subjugating "
+"software. It's unethical. It's not a contribution to society, it's a power "
+"grab. This unethical practice should not exist; the goal of the free "
+"software movement is to put an end to it. All software should be free, so "
+"that all users can be free."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Proprietary software keeps the users divided and helpless: divided, because "
+"they're forbidden to share it, and helpless, because they don't have the "
+"source code so they can't change it. They can't even study it to verify "
+"what it's really doing to them, and many proprietary programs have malicious "
+"features which spy on the user, restrict the user, even back doors to attack "
+"the user."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"For instance, Microsoft Windows has a back door with which Microsoft can "
+"forcibly install software changes, without getting permission from the "
+"supposed owner of the computer. You may think it's your computer, but if "
+"you've made the mistake of having Windows running in it, then really "
+"Microsoft has owned your computer. Computers need to be defenestrated, "
+"which means either throw Windows out of the computer, or throw the computer "
+"out the window."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"But any proprietary software gives the developers unjust power over the "
+"users. Some of the developers abuse this power more, and some abuse it "
+"less, but none of them ought to have it. You deserve to have control of "
+"your computing, and not be forcibly dependent on a particular company. So "
+"you deserve free software."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"At the end of speeches about free software, people sometimes ask whether "
+"these same freedoms and ideas apply to other things. If you have a copy of "
+"a published work on your computer, it makes sense to ask whether you should "
+"have the same four freedoms—whether it's ethically essential that you "
+"have them or not. And that's the question that I'm going to address today."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"If you have a copy of something that's not software, for the most part, the "
+"only thing that might deny you any of these freedoms is copyright law. With "
+"software that's not so. The main ways of making software non-free are "
+"contracts and withholding the source code from the users. Copyright is a "
+"sort of secondary, back up method. For other things there's no such "
+"distinction as between source code and executable code."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"For instance, if we're talking about a text, if you can see the text to read "
+"it, there's nothing in the text that you can't see. So it's not the same "
+"kind of issue exactly as software. It's for the most part only copyright "
+"that might deny you these freedoms."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"So the question can be restated: “What should copyright law allow you "
+"to do with published works? What should copyright law say?”"
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Copyright has developed along with copying technology, so it's useful to "
+"review the history of copying technology. Copying developed in the ancient "
+"world, where you'd use a writing instrument on a writing surface. You'd "
+"read one copy and write another."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"This technology was rather inefficient, but another interesting "
+"characteristic was that it had no economy of scale. To write ten copies "
+"would take ten times as long as to write one copy. It required no special "
+"equipment other than the equipment for writing, and it required no special "
+"skill other than literacy itself. The result was that copies of any "
+"particular book were made in a decentralized manner. Wherever there was a "
+"copy, if someone wanted to copy it, he could."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"There was nothing like copyright in the ancient world. If you had a copy "
+"and wanted to copy it, nobody was going to tell you you weren't "
+"allowed—except if the local prince didn't like what the book said, in "
+"which case he might punish you for copying it. But that's not copyright, "
+"but rather something closely related, namely censorship. To this day, "
+"copyright is often used in attempts to censor people."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"That went on for thousands of years, but then there was a big advance in "
+"copying technology, namely the printing press. The printing press made "
+"copying more efficient, but not uniformly. [This was] because mass "
+"production copying became a lot more efficient, but making one copy at a "
+"time didn't benefit from the printing press. In fact, you were better off "
+"just writing it by hand; that would be faster than trying to print one copy."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"The printing press has an economy of scale: it takes a lot of work to set "
+"the type, but then you can make many copies very fast. Also, the printing "
+"press and the type were expensive equipment that most people didn't own; and "
+"the ability to use them, most literate people didn't know. Using a press "
+"was a different skill from writing. The result was a centralized manner of "
+"producing copies: the copies of any given book would be made in a few "
+"places, and then they would be transported to wherever someone wanted to buy "
+"copies."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Copyright began in the age of the printing press. Copyright in England "
+"began as a system of censorship in the 1500s. I believe it was originally "
+"meant to censor Protestants, but it was turned around and used to censor "
+"Catholics and presumably lots of others as well. According to this law, in "
+"order to publish a book you had to get permission from the Crown, and this "
+"permission was granted in the form of a perpetual monopoly to publish it. "
+"This was allowed to lapse in the 1680s, I believe [it expired in 1695 "
+"according to the Wikipedia entry]. The publishers wanted it back again, but "
+"what they got was something somewhat different. The Statute of Anne gave "
+"authors a copyright, and only for 14 years, although the author could renew "
+"it once."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"This was a totally different idea—a temporary monopoly for the author, "
+"instead of a perpetual monopoly for the publisher. The idea developed that "
+"copyright was a means of promoting writing."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"When the US constitution was written, some people wanted authors to be "
+"entitled to a copyright, but that was rejected. Instead, the US "
+"Constitution says that Congress can optionally adopt a copyright law, and if "
+"there is a copyright law, its purpose is to promote progress. In other "
+"words, the purpose is not benefits for copyright holders or anybody they do "
+"business with, but for the general public. Copyright has to last a limited "
+"time; publishers keep hoping for us to forget about this."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Here we have an idea of copyright which is an industrial regulation on "
+"publishers, controlled by authors, and designed to provide benefits to the "
+"public at large. It functioned this way because it didn't restrict the "
+"readers."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Now in the early centuries of printing, and still I believe in the 1790s, "
+"lots of readers wrote copies by hand because they couldn't afford printed "
+"copies. Nobody ever expected copyright law to be something other than an "
+"industrial regulation. It wasn't meant to stop people from writing copies, "
+"it was meant to regulate the publishers. Because of this it was easy to "
+"enforce, uncontroversial, and arguably beneficial for society."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"It was easy to enforce, because it only had to be enforced against "
+"publishers. And it's easy to find the unauthorized publishers of a "
+"book—you go to a bookstore and say 'where do these copies come "
+"from?'. You don't have to invade everybody's home and everybody's computer "
+"to do that."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"It was uncontroversial because, as the readers were not restricted, they had "
+"nothing to complain about. Theoretically they were restricted from "
+"publishing, but not being publishers and not having printing presses, they "
+"couldn't do that anyway. In what they actually could do, they were not "
+"restricted."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"It was arguably beneficial because the general public, according to the "
+"concepts of copyright law, traded away a theoretical right they were not in "
+"a position to exercise. In exchange, they got the benefits of more writing."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Now if you trade away something you have no possible use for, and you get "
+"something you can use in exchange, it's a positive trade. Whether or not "
+"you could have gotten a better deal some other way, that's a different "
+"question, but at least it's positive."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"So if this were still in the age of the printing press, I don't think I'd be "
+"complaining about copyright law. But the age of the printing press is "
+"gradually giving way to the age of the computer networks—another "
+"advance in copying technology that makes copying more efficient, and once "
+"again not uniformly so."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Here's what we had in the age of the printing press: mass production very "
+"efficient, one at a time copying still just as slow as the ancient world. "
+"Digital technology gets us here: they've both benefited, but one-off copying "
+"has benefited the most."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"We get to a situation much more like the ancient world, where one at a time "
+"copying is not so much worse [i.e., harder] than mass production copying. "
+"It's a little bit less efficient, a little bit less good, but it's perfectly "
+"cheap enough that hundreds of millions of people do it. Consider how many "
+"people write CDs once in a while, even in poor countries. You may not have "
+"a CD-writer yourself, so you go to a store where you can do it."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"This means that copyright no longer fits in with the technology as it used "
+"to. Even if the words of copyright law had not changed, they wouldn't have "
+"the same effect. Instead of an industrial regulation on publishers "
+"controlled by authors, with the benefits set up to go to the public, it is "
+"now a restriction on the general public, controlled mainly by the "
+"publishers, in the name of the authors."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"In other words, it's tyranny. It's intolerable and we can't allow it to "
+"continue this way."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"As a result of this change, [copyright] is no longer easy to enforce, no "
+"longer uncontroversial, and no longer beneficial."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"It's no longer easy to enforce because now the publishers want to enforce it "
+"against each and every person, and to do this requires cruel measures, "
+"draconian punishments, invasions of privacy, abolition of our basic ideas of "
+"justice. There's almost no limit to how far they will propose to go to "
+"prosecute the War on Sharing."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"It's no longer uncontroversial. There are political parties in several "
+"countries whose basic platform is 'freedom to share'."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"It's no longer beneficial because the freedoms that we conceptually traded "
+"away (because we couldn't exercise them), we now can exercise. They're "
+"tremendously useful, and we want to exercise them."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid "What would a democratic government do in this situation?"
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"It would reduce copyright power. It would say: “The trade we made on "
+"behalf of our citizens, trading away some of their freedom which now they "
+"need, is intolerable. We have to change this; we can't trade away the "
+"freedom that is important.” We can measure the sickness of democracy "
+"by the tendency of governments to do the exact opposite around the world, "
+"extending copyright power when they should reduce it."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"One example is in the dimension of time. Around the world we see pressure "
+"to make copyright last longer and longer and longer."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"A wave of this started in the US in 1998. Copyright was extended by 20 "
+"years on both past and future works. I do not understand how they hope to "
+"convince the now dead or senile writers of the 20s and 30s to write more "
+"back then by extending copyright on their works now. If they have a time "
+"machine with which to inform them, they haven't used it. Our history books "
+"don't say that there was a burst of vigor in the arts in the 20s when all "
+"the artists found out that their copyrights would be extended in 1998."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"It's theoretically conceivable that 20 years more copyright on future works "
+"would convince people to make more effort in producing those works. But not "
+"anyone rational, because the discounted present value of 20 more years of "
+"copyright starting 75 years in the future—if it's a work made for "
+"hire—and probably even longer if it's a work with an individual "
+"copyright holder, is so small it couldn't persuade any rational person to do "
+"anything different. Any business that wants to claim otherwise ought to "
+"present its projected balance sheets for 75 years in the future, which of "
+"course they can't do because none of them really looks that far ahead."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"The real reason for this law, the desire that prompted various companies to "
+"purchase this law in the US Congress, which is how laws are decided on for "
+"the most part, was they had lucrative monopolies and they wanted those "
+"monopolies to continue."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"For instance, Disney was aware that the first film in which Mickey Mouse "
+"appeared would go into the public domain in a few years, and then anybody "
+"would be free to draw that same character as part of other works. Disney "
+"didn't want that to happen. Disney borrows a lot from the public domain, "
+"but is determined never to give the slightest thing back. So Disney paid "
+"for this law, which we refer to as the Mickey Mouse Copyright Act."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"The movie companies say they want perpetual copyright, but the US "
+"Constitution won't let them get that officially. So they came up with a way "
+"to get the same result unofficially: “perpetual copyright on the "
+"installment plan”. Every 20 years they extend copyright for 20 more "
+"years. So that at any given time, any given work has a date when it will "
+"supposedly fall into the public domain. But that date is like tomorrow, it "
+"never comes. By the time you get there they will have postponed it, unless "
+"we stop them next time."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"That's one dimension, the dimension of duration. But even more important is "
+"the dimension of breadth: which uses of the work does copyright cover?"
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"In the age of the printing press, copyright wasn't supposed to cover all "
+"uses of a copyrighted work, because copyright regulated certain uses that "
+"were the exceptions in a broader space of unregulated uses. There were "
+"certain things you were simply allowed to do with your copy of a book."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Now the publishers have got the idea that they can turn our computers "
+"against us, and use them to seize total power over all use of published "
+"works. They want to set up a pay-per-view universe. They're doing it with "
+"DRM (Digital Restrictions Management)—the intentional features of "
+"software that's designed to restrict the user. And often the computer "
+"itself is designed to restrict the user."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"The first way in which the general public saw this was in DVDs. A movie on "
+"a DVD was usually encrypted, and the format was secret. The DVD conspiracy "
+"kept this secret because they said anyone that wants to make DVD players has "
+"to join the conspiracy, promise to keep the format secret, and promise to "
+"design the DVD players to restrict the users according to the rules, which "
+"say it has to stop the user from doing this, from doing that, from doing "
+"that—a precise set of requirements, all of which are malicious towards "
+"us."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"It worked for a while, but then some people figured out the secret format, "
+"and published free software capable of reading the movie on a DVD and "
+"playing it. Then the publishers said “since we can't actually stop "
+"them, we have to make it a crime”. And they started that in the US in "
+"1998 with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which imposed censorship on "
+"software capable of doing such jobs."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"So that particular piece of free software was the subject of a court case. "
+"Its distribution in the US is forbidden; the US practices censorship of "
+"software."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"The movie companies are well aware that they can't really make that program "
+"disappear—it's easy enough to find it. So they designed another "
+"encryption system, which they hoped would be harder to break, and it's "
+"called AACS, or the axe."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"The AACS conspiracy makes precise rules about all players. For instance, in "
+"2011 it's going to be forbidden to make analog video outputs. So all video "
+"outputs will have to be digital, and they will carry the signal encrypted "
+"into a monitor specially designed to keep secrets from the user. That is "
+"malicious hardware. They say that the purpose of this is to “close "
+"the analog hole”. I'll show you a couple of analog holes (Stallman "
+"takes off his glasses): here's one and here's another, that they'd like to "
+"poke out permanently."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"How do I know about these conspiracies? The reason is they're not "
+"secret—they have websites. The AACS website proudly describes the "
+"contracts that manufacturers have to sign, which is how I know about this "
+"requirement. It proudly states the names of the companies that have "
+"established this conspiracy, which include Microsoft and Apple, and Intel, "
+"and Sony, and Disney, and IBM."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"A conspiracy of companies designed to restrict the public's access to "
+"technology ought to be prosecuted as a serious crime, like a conspiracy to "
+"fix prices, except it's worse, so the prison sentences for this should be "
+"longer. But these companies are quite confident that our governments are on "
+"their side against us. They have no fear against being prosecuted for these "
+"conspiracies, which is why they don't bother to hide them."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"In general DRM is set up by a conspiracy of companies. Once in a while a "
+"single company can do it, but generally it requires a conspiracy between "
+"technology companies and publishers, so [it's] almost always a conspiracy."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"They thought that nobody would ever be able to break the AACS, but about "
+"three and a half years ago someone released a free program capable of "
+"decrypting that format. However, it was totally useless, because in order "
+"to run it you need to know the key."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"And then, six months later, I saw a photo of two adorable puppies, with 32 "
+"hex digits above them, and I wondered: “Why put those two things "
+"together? I wonder if those numbers are some important key, and someone "
+"could have put the numbers together with the puppies, figuring people would "
+"copy the photo of the puppies because they were so cute. This would protect "
+"the key from being wiped out.”"
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"And that's what it was—that was the key to break the axe. People "
+"posted it, and editors deleted it, because laws in many countries now "
+"conscript them to censor this information. It was posted again, they "
+"deleted it; eventually they gave up, and in two weeks this number was posted "
+"in over 700,000 web sites."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"That's a big outpouring of public disgust with DRM. But it didn't win the "
+"war, because the publishers changed the key. Not only that: with HD DVD, "
+"this was adequate to break the DRM, but not with Blu-ray. Blu-ray has an "
+"additional level of DRM and so far there is no free software that can break "
+"it, which means that you must regard Blu-ray disks as something incompatible "
+"with your own freedom. They are an enemy with which no accommodation is "
+"possible, at least not with our present level of knowledge."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Never accept any product designed to attack your freedom. If you don't have "
+"the free software to play a DVD, you mustn't buy or rent any DVDs, or accept "
+"them even as gifts, except for the rare non-encrypted DVDs, which there are "
+"a few of. I actually have a few [of these]—I don't have any encrypted "
+"DVDs, I won't take them."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid "So this is how things stand in video, but we've also seen DRM in music."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"For instance, about ten years ago we started to see things that looked like "
+"compact disks, but they weren't written quite like compact disks. They "
+"didn't follow the standard. We called them 'corrupt disks', and the idea of "
+"them was that they would play in an audio player, but it was impossible to "
+"read them on a computer. These different methods had various problems."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Eventually Sony came up with a clever idea. They put a program on the disk, "
+"so that if you stuck the disk into a computer, the disk would install the "
+"program. This program was designed like a virus to take control of the "
+"system. It's called a 'root kit', meaning that it has things in it to break "
+"the security of the system so that it can install the software deep inside "
+"the system, and modify various parts of the system."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"For instance, it modified the command you could use to examine the system to "
+"see if the software was present, so as to disguise itself. It modified the "
+"command you could use to delete some of these files, so that it wouldn't "
+"really delete them. Now all of this is a serious crime, but it's not the "
+"only one Sony committed, because the software also included free software "
+"code—code that had been released under the GNU General Public License."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Now the GNU GPL is a copyleft license, and that means it says “Yes, "
+"you're free to put this code into other things, but when you do, the entire "
+"program that you put things into you must release as free software under the "
+"same license. And you must make the source code available to users, and to "
+"inform them of their rights you must give them a copy of this license when "
+"they get the software.”"
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Sony didn't comply with all that. That's commercial copyright infringement, "
+"which is a felony. They're both felonies, but Sony wasn't prosecuted "
+"because the government understands that the purpose of the government and "
+"the law is to maintain the power of those companies over us, not to help "
+"defend our freedom in any way."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"People got angry and they sued Sony. However, they made a mistake. They "
+"focused their condemnation not on the evil purpose of this scheme, but only "
+"on the secondary evils of the various methods that Sony used. So Sony "
+"settled the lawsuits and promised that in the future, when it attacks our "
+"freedom, it will not do those other things."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Actually, that particular corrupt disk scheme was not so bad, because if you "
+"were not using Windows it would not affect you at all. Even if you were "
+"using Windows, there's a key on the keyboard—if you remembered every "
+"time to hold it down, then the disk wouldn't install the software. But of "
+"course it's hard to remember that every time; you're going to slip up some "
+"day. This shows the kind of thing we've had to deal with."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Fortunately music DRM is receding. Even the main record companies sell "
+"downloads without DRM. But we see a renewed effort to impose DRM on books."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"You see, the publishers want to take away the traditional freedoms of book "
+"readers—freedom to do things such as borrow a book from the public "
+"library, or lend it to a friend; to sell a book to a used book store, or buy "
+"it anonymously paying cash (which is the only way I buy books—we've "
+"got to resist the temptations to let Big Brother know everything that we're "
+"doing.)"
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Even the freedom to keep the book as long as you wish, and read it as many "
+"times as you wish, they plan to get rid of."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"The way they do it is with DRM. They knew that so many people read books "
+"and would get angry if these freedoms were taken away that they didn't "
+"believe they could buy a law specifically to abolish these freedoms—"
+"there would be too much opposition. Democracy is sick, but once in a while "
+"people manage to demand something. So they came up with a two-stage plan."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"First, take away these freedoms from ebooks, and second, convince people to "
+"switch from paper books to ebooks. They've succeeded with stage 1."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"In the US they did it with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and in New "
+"Zealand, that was part of the year-ago Copyright Act; censorship on software "
+"that can break DRM was part of that law. That's an unjust provision; it's "
+"got to be repealed."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"The second stage is convince people to switch from printed books to ebooks; "
+"that didn't go so well."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"One publisher in 2001 had the idea they would make their line of ebooks "
+"really popular if they started it with my biography. So they found an "
+"author and the author asked me if I'd cooperate, and I said “Only if "
+"this ebook is published without encryption, without DRM”. The "
+"publisher wouldn't go along with that, and I just stuck to it—I said "
+"no. Eventually we found another publisher who was willing to do this—"
+"in fact willing to publish the book under a free license giving you the four "
+"freedoms—so the book was then published, and sold a lot of copies on "
+"paper."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"But in any case, ebooks failed at the beginning of this decade. People just "
+"didn't want to read them very much. And I said, “they will try "
+"again”. We saw an amazing number of news articles about electronic "
+"ink (or is it electronic paper, I can never remember which), and it occurred "
+"to me probably the reason there's so many is the publishers want us to think "
+"about this. They want us to be eager for the next generation of ebook "
+"readers."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Now they're upon us. Things like the Sony Shreader (its official name is "
+"the Sony Reader, but if you put on 'sh' it explains what it's designed to do "
+"to your books), and the Amazon Swindle, designed to swindle you out of your "
+"traditional freedoms without your noticing. Of course, they call it the "
+"Kindle which is what it's going to do to your books."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"The Kindle is an extremely malicious product, almost as malicious as "
+"Microsoft Windows. They both have spy features, they both have Digital "
+"Restrictions Management, and they both have back doors."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"In the case of the Kindle, the only way you can buy a book is to buy it from "
+"Amazon, and Amazon requires you to identify yourself, so they know "
+"everything that you've bought."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Then there is Digital Restrictions Management, so you can't lend the book or "
+"sell it to a used bookstore, and the library can't lend it either."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"And then there's the back door, which we found out about about three months "
+"ago, because Amazon used it. Amazon sent a command to all the Kindles to "
+"erase a particular book, namely 1984 by George Orwell. Yes, they couldn't "
+"have picked a more ironic book to erase. So that's how we know that Amazon "
+"has a back door with which it can erase books remotely."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"What else it can do, who knows? Maybe it's like Microsoft Windows. Maybe "
+"Amazon can remotely upgrade the software, which means that whatever "
+"malicious things are not in it now, they could put them in it tomorrow."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"This is intolerable—any one of these restrictions is intolerable. "
+"They want to create a world where nobody lends books to anybody anymore."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Imagine that you visit a friend and there are no books on the shelf. It's "
+"not that your friend doesn't read, but his books are all inside a device, "
+"and of course he can't lend you those books. The only way he could lend you "
+"any one of those books is to lend you his whole library, which is obviously "
+"a ridiculous thing to ask anybody to do. So there goes friendship for "
+"people who love books."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Make sure that you inform people what this device implies. It means other "
+"readers will no longer be your friends, because you will be acting like a "
+"jerk toward them. Spread the word preemptively. This device is your "
+"enemy. It's the enemy of everyone who reads. The people who don't "
+"recognize that are the people who are thinking so short-term that they don't "
+"see it. It's our job to help them see beyond the momentary convenience to "
+"the implications of this device."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"I have nothing against distributing books in digital form, if they are not "
+"designed to take away our freedom. Strictly speaking, it is possible to "
+"have an ebook reader:"
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><ul><li>
+msgid "that is not designed to attack you,"
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><ul><li>
+msgid "which runs free software and not proprietary software,"
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><ul><li>
+msgid "which doesn't have DRM,"
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><ul><li>
+msgid "which doesn't make people identify yourself to get a book,"
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><ul><li>
+msgid "which doesn't have a back door, [and]"
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><ul><li>
+msgid "which doesn't restrict what you can do with the files on your machine."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"It's possible, but the big companies really pushing ebooks are doing it to "
+"attack our freedom, and we mustn't stand for that. This is what governments "
+"are doing in cahoots with big business to attack our freedom, by making "
+"copyright harsher and nastier, more restrictive than ever before."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"But what should they do? Governments should make copyright power less. Here "
+"are my specific proposals."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"First of all, there is the dimension of time. I propose copyright should "
+"last ten years, starting from the date of publication of a work."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Why from the date of publication? Because before that, we don't have "
+"copies. It doesn't matter to us whether we would have been allowed to copy "
+"our copies that we don't have, so I figure we might as well let the authors "
+"have as much time as it takes to arrange publication, and then start the "
+"clock."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"But why ten years? I don't know about in this country, but in the US, the "
+"publication cycle has got shorter and shorter. Nowadays almost all books "
+"are remaindered within two years and out-of-print within three. So ten "
+"years is more than three times the usual publication cycle—that should "
+"be plenty comfortable."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"But not everybody agrees. I once proposed this in a panel discussion with "
+"fiction writers, and the award-winning fantasy writer next to me said “"
+"Ten years? No way. Anything more than five years is intolerable.” You "
+"see, he had a legal dispute with his publisher. His books seemed to be out "
+"of print, but the publisher wouldn't admit it. The publisher was using the "
+"copyright on his own book to stop him from distributing copies himself, "
+"which he wanted to do so people could read it."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"This is what every artist starts out wanting—wanting to distribute her "
+"work so it will get read and appreciated. Very few make a lot of money. "
+"That tiny fraction face the danger of being morally corrupted, like J.K. "
+"Rowling."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"J.K. Rowling, in Canada, got an injunction against people who had bought her "
+"book in a bookstore, ordering them not to read it. So in response I call "
+"for a boycott of Harry Potter books. But I don't say you shouldn't read "
+"them; I leave that to the author and the publisher. I just say you "
+"shouldn't buy them."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"It's few authors that make enough money that they can be corrupted in this "
+"way. Most of them don't get anywhere near that, and continue wanting the "
+"same thing they wanted at the outset: they want their work to be appreciated."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"He wanted to distribute his own book, and copyright was stopping him. He "
+"realized that more than five years of copyright was unlikely to ever do him "
+"any good."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"If people would rather have copyright last five years, I won't be against "
+"it. I propose ten as a first stab at the problem. Let's reduce it to ten "
+"years and then take stock for a while, and we could adjust it after that. I "
+"don't say I think ten years is the exact right number—I don't know."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"What about the dimension of breadth? Which activities should copyright "
+"cover? I distinguish three broad categories of works."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"First of all, there are the functional works that you use to do a practical "
+"job in your life. This includes software, recipes, educational works, "
+"reference works, text fonts, and other things you can think of. These works "
+"should be free."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"If you use the work to do a job in your life, then if you can't change the "
+"work to suit you, you don't control your life. Once you have changed the "
+"work to suit you, then you've got to be free to publish it—publish "
+"your version—because there will be others who will want the changes "
+"you've made."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"This leads quickly to the conclusion that users have to have the same four "
+"freedoms [for all functional works], not just for software. And you'll "
+"notice that for recipes, practically speaking, cooks are always sharing and "
+"changing recipes just as if the recipes were free. Imagine how people would "
+"react if the government tried to stamp out so-called 'recipe piracy'."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"The term 'pirate' is pure propaganda. When people ask me what I think of "
+"music piracy, I say “As far as I know, when pirates attack they don't "
+"do it by playing instruments badly, they do it with arms. So it's not music "
+"'piracy', because piracy is attacking ships, and sharing is as far as you "
+"get from being the moral equivalent of attacking ships”. Attacking "
+"ships is bad, sharing with other people is good, so we should firmly "
+"denounce that propaganda term 'piracy' whenever we hear it."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"People might have objected twenty years ago: “If we don't give up our "
+"freedom, if we don't let the publishers of these works control us, the works "
+"won't get made and that will be a horrible disaster.” Now, looking at "
+"the free software community, and all the recipes that circulate, and "
+"reference works like Wikipedia—we are even starting to see free "
+"textbooks being published—we know that that fear is misguided."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"There is no need to despair and give up our freedom thinking that otherwise "
+"the works won't get made. There are lots of ways to encourage them to get "
+"made if we want more—lots of ways that are consistent with and respect "
+"our freedom. In this category, they should all be free."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"But what about the second category, of works that say what certain people "
+"thought, like memoirs, essays of opinion, scientific papers, and various "
+"other things? To publish a modified version of somebody else's statement of "
+"what he thought is misrepresenting [that] somebody. That's not particularly "
+"a contribution to society."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Therefore it is workable and acceptable to have a somewhat reduced copyright "
+"system where all commercial use is covered by copyright, all modification is "
+"covered by copyright, but everyone is free to non-commercially redistribute "
+"exact copies."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"That freedom is the minimum freedom we must establish for all published "
+"works, because the denial of that freedom is what creates the War on "
+"Sharing—what creates the vicious propaganda that sharing is theft, "
+"that sharing is like being a pirate and attacking ships. Absurdities, but "
+"absurdities backed by a lot of money that has corrupted our governments. We "
+"need to end the War on Sharing; we need to legalize sharing exact copies of "
+"any published work."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"In the second category of works, that's all we need; we don't need to make "
+"them free. Therefore I think it's OK to have a reduced copyright system "
+"which covers commercial use and all modifications. And this will provide a "
+"revenue stream to the authors in more or less the same (usually inadequate) "
+"way as the present system. You've got to keep in mind [that] the present "
+"system, except for superstars, is usually totally inadequate."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"What about works of art and entertainment? Here it took me a while to decide "
+"what to think about modifications."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"You see, on one hand, a work of art can have an artistic integrity and "
+"modifying it could destroy that. Of course, copyright doesn't necessarily "
+"stop works from being butchered that way. Hollywood does it all the time. "
+"On the other hand, modifying the work can be a contribution to art. It "
+"makes possible the folk process which leads to things which are beautiful "
+"and rich."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Even if we look at named authors only: consider Shakespeare, who borrowed "
+"stories from other works only a few decades old, and did them in different "
+"ways, and made important works of literature. If today's copyright law had "
+"existed then, that would have been forbidden and those plays wouldn't have "
+"been written."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"But eventually I realized that modifying a work of art can be a contribution "
+"to art, but it's not desperately urgent in most cases. If you had to wait "
+"ten years for the copyright to expire, you could wait that long. Not like "
+"the present-day copyright that makes you wait maybe 75 years, or 95 years. "
+"In Mexico you might have to wait almost 200 years in some cases, because "
+"copyright in Mexico expires a hundred years after the author dies. This is "
+"insane, but ten years, as I've proposed copyright should last, that people "
+"can wait."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"So I propose the same partly reduced copyright that covers commercial use "
+"and modification, but everyone's got to be free to non-commercially "
+"redistribute exact copies. After ten years it goes into the public domain, "
+"and people can contribute to art by publishing their modified versions."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"One other thing: if you're going to take little pieces out of a bunch of "
+"works and rearrange them into something totally different, that should just "
+"be legal, because the purpose of copyright is to promote art, not to "
+"obstruct art. It's stupid to apply copyright to using snippets like "
+"that—it's self-defeating. It's a kind of distortion that you'd only "
+"get when the government is under the control of the publishers of the "
+"existing successful works, and has totally lost sight of its intended "
+"purpose."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"That's what I propose, and in particular, this means that sharing copies on "
+"the Internet must be legal. Sharing is good. Sharing builds the bonds of "
+"society. To attack sharing is to attack society."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"So any time the government proposes some new means to attack people who "
+"share, to stop them from sharing, we have to recognize that this is evil, "
+"not just because the means proposed almost invariably offend basic ideas of "
+"justice (but that's not a coincidence). The reason is because the purpose "
+"is evil. Sharing is good and the government should encourage sharing."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"But copyright did after all have a useful purpose. Copyright as a means to "
+"carry out that purpose has a problem now, because it doesn't fit in with the "
+"technology we use. It interferes with all the vital freedoms for all the "
+"readers, listeners, viewers, and whatever, but the goal of promoting the "
+"arts is still desirable. So in addition to the partly reduced copyright "
+"system, which would continue to be a copyright system, I propose two other "
+"methods."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"One is taxes—distribute tax money directly to artists. This could be "
+"a special tax, perhaps on Internet connectivity, or it could come from "
+"general revenue, because it won't be that much money in total, not if it's "
+"distributed in an efficient way. To distribute it efficiently to promote "
+"the arts means not in linear proportion to popularity. It should be based "
+"on popularity, because we don't want bureaucrats to have the discretion to "
+"decide which artists to support and which to ignore, but based on popularity "
+"does not imply linear proportion."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"What I propose is measure the popularity of the various artists, which you "
+"could do through polling (samples) in which nobody is required to "
+"participate, and then take the cube root. The cube root looks like this: it "
+"means basically that [the payment] tapers off after a while."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"If superstar A is a thousand times as popular as successful artist B, with "
+"this system A would get ten times as much money as B, not a thousand times."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Linearly would give A a thousand times as much as B, which means that if we "
+"wanted B to get enough to live on we're going to have to make A tremendously "
+"rich. This is wasteful use of the tax money—it shouldn't be done."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"But if we make it taper off, then yes, each superstar will get handsomely "
+"more than an ordinary successful artist, but the total of all the superstars "
+"will be a small fraction of the [total] money. Most of the money will go to "
+"support a large number of fairly successful artists, fairly appreciated "
+"artists, fairly popular artists. Thus the system will use money a lot more "
+"efficiently than the existing system."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"The existing system is regressive. It actually gives far, far more per "
+"record, for instance, to a superstar than to anybody else. The money is "
+"extremely badly used. The result is we'd actually be paying a lot less this "
+"way. I hope that's enough to mollify some of these people who have a knee-"
+"jerk hostile reaction to taxes—one that I don't share, because I "
+"believe in a welfare state."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"I have another suggestion which is voluntary payments. Suppose every player "
+"had a button you could push to send a dollar to the artist who made the work "
+"you're currently playing or the last one you played. This money would be "
+"delivered anonymously to those artists. I think a lot of people would push "
+"that button fairly often."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"For instance, all of us could afford to push that button once every day, and "
+"we wouldn't miss that much money. It's not that much money for us, I'm "
+"pretty sure. Of course, there are poor people who couldn't afford to push "
+"it ever, and it's OK if they don't. We don't need to squeeze money out of "
+"poor people to support the artists. There are enough people who are not "
+"poor to do the job just fine. I'm sure you're aware that a lot of people "
+"really love certain art and are really happy to support the artists."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"An idea just came to me. The player could also give you a certificate of "
+"having supported so-and-so, and it could even count up how many times you "
+"had done it and give you a certificate that says “I sent so much to "
+"these artists”. There are various ways we could encourage people who "
+"want to do it."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"For instance, we could have a PR campaign which is friendly and kind: “"
+"Have you sent a dollar to some artists today? Why not? It's only a "
+"dollar—you'll never miss it and don't you love what they're doing? "
+"Push the button!” It will make people feel good, and they'll think "
+"“Yeah, I love what I just watched. I'll send a dollar.”"
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"This is already starting to work to some extent. There's a Canadian singer "
+"who used to be called Jane Siberry. She put her music on her website and "
+"invited people to download it and pay whatever amount they wished. She "
+"reported getting an average of more than a dollar per copy, which is "
+"interesting because the major record companies charge just under a dollar "
+"per copy. By letting people decide whether and how much to pay, she got "
+"more—she got even more per visitor who was actually downloading "
+"something. But this might not even count whether there was an effect of "
+"bringing more people to come, and [thus] increasing the total number that "
+"this average was against."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"So it can work, but it's a pain in the neck under present circumstances. "
+"You've got to have a credit card to do it, and that means you can't do it "
+"anonymously. And you've got to go find where you're going to pay, and the "
+"payment systems for small amounts, they're not very efficient, so the "
+"artists are only getting half of it. If we set up a good system for this, "
+"it would work far, far better."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid "So these are my two suggestions."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"And in mecenatglobal.org, you can find another scheme that combines aspects "
+"of the two, which was invented by Francis Muguet and designed to fit in with "
+"existing legal systems better to make it easier to enact."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Be careful of proposals to “compensate the rights holders”, "
+"because when they say 'compensate', they're trying to presume that if you "
+"have appreciated a work, you now have a specific debt to somebody, and that "
+"you have to “compensate” that somebody. When they say 'rights "
+"holders', it's supposed to make you think it's supporting artists while in "
+"fact it's going to the publishers—the same publishers who basically "
+"exploit all the artists (except the few that you've all heard of, who are so "
+"popular that they have clout)."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"We don't owe a debt; we have nobody that we have to “"
+"compensate”. [But] supporting the arts is still a useful thing to "
+"do. That was the motivation for copyright back when copyright fit in with "
+"the technology of the day. Today copyright is a bad way to do it, but it's "
+"still good to do it other ways that respect our freedom."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <dl><dd><p>
+msgid ""
+"Demand that they change the two evil parts of the New Zealand Copyright "
+"Act. They shouldn't replace the three strikes punishment, because sharing "
+"is good, and they've got to get rid of the censorship for the software to "
+"break DRM. Beware of ACTA—they're trying to negotiate a treaty "
+"between various countries, for all of these countries to attack their "
+"citizens, and we don't know how because they won't tell us."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+msgid ""
+"<a href=\"/philosophy/copyright-versus-community-2000.html\">Click here</a> "
+"for an older version of this talk from 2000."
+msgstr ""
+
+# type: Content of: <div>
+#. TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't have notes.
+msgid "*GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S NOTES*"
+msgstr " "
+
+# type: Content of: <div><p>
+msgid ""
+"Please send FSF & GNU inquiries to <a href=\"mailto:address@hidden";
+"\"><em>address@hidden</em></a>. There are also <a href=\"/contact/\">other "
+"ways to contact</a> the FSF. <br /> Please send broken links and other "
+"corrections (or suggestions) to <a href=\"mailto:address@hidden";
+"\"><em>address@hidden</em></a>."
+msgstr ""
+"Veuillez envoyer les requêtes concernant la FSF et GNU à <a href=\"mailto:";
+"address@hidden"><em>address@hidden</em></a>. Il existe aussi <a
href=\"/contact/"
+"\">d'autres moyens de contacter</a> la FSF. <br /> Veuillez envoyer les "
+"liens orphelins ou d'autres suggestions sur cette page Web aux <a href=\"/"
+"people/webmeisters.html\">webmestres de GNU</a> Ã l'adresse <a
href=\"mailto:";
+"address@hidden"><em>address@hidden</em></a>."
+
+# type: Content of: <div><p>
+msgid ""
+"Please see the <a href=\"/server/standards/README.translations.html"
+"\">Translations README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting "
+"translations of this article."
+msgstr ""
+"Veuillez consulter le <a href=\"/server/standards/README.translations.fr.html"
+"\">README des traductions</a> pour des informations sur la coordination et "
+"la soumission de traductions de cet article."
+
+# type: Content of: <div><p>
+msgid "Copyright © 2001, 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.,"
+msgstr "Copyright © 2001, 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.,"
+
+# type: Content of: <div><address>
+msgid "51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110, USA"
+msgstr "51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110, USA"
+
+# type: Content of: <div><p>
+msgid ""
+"Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any "
+"medium, provided this notice is preserved."
+msgstr ""
+"La reproduction exacte et la distribution intégrale de cet article est "
+"permise sur n'importe quel support d'archivage, pourvu que cette notice soit "
+"préservée."
+
+# type: Content of: <div><div>
+#. TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits.
+msgid "*GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S CREDITS*"
+msgstr ""
+"Traduction : Miluz.<br /> Révision : <a
href=\"mailto:trad-gnu@";
+"april.org\">trad-gnu@april.org</a>"
+
+# type: Content of: <div><p>
+#. timestamp start
+msgid "Updated:"
+msgstr "Dernière mise à jour :"
+
+# type: Content of: <div><h4>
+msgid "Translations of this page"
+msgstr "Traductions de cette page"
+
+# type: Content of: <pre>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "\n"
+#~ "This is a transcription from an audio recording, prepared by Douglas\n"
+#~ "Carnall, July 2000.\n"
+#~ "\n"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "\n"
+#~ "Ceci est la retranscription d'un enregistrement audio
réalisé par\n"
+#~ "Douglas Carnall, en juillet 2000.\n"
+#~ "\n"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<em> Mr Stallman arrives a few minutes after the appointed hour of "
+#~ "commencement of his talk to address a hushed and respectful audience. He "
+#~ "speaks with great precision and almost no hesitation in a pronounced "
+#~ "Boston accent.</em>"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<em>M. Stallman arrive quelques minutes après l'heure pré"
+#~ "vue du début de sa conférence pour s'adresser à une "
+#~ "assistance silencieuse et respectueuse. Il parle avec une grande "
+#~ "précision et presque sans hésitation avec un accent "
+#~ "prononcé de Boston.</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: This is made for someone who wears a strangler."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS </strong>: Ceci est fait pour quelqu'un qui porte un "
+#~ "strangler."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<em>[indicates clip-on microphone for lecture theatre amplification "
+#~ "system]</em>"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<em>[il indique le micro à agrafe du système "
+#~ "d'amplification de la salle de conférence]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "I don't wear stranglers, so there is no place for it to go."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Je ne porte pas de strangler, alors il n'y a pas de place pour le mettre"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[clips it to his T-shirt]</em>"
+#~ msgstr "<em>[Il l'accroche à son T-shirt]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>Me</strong>: Are you OK with the recording?"
+#~ msgstr "<strong>Moi</strong> : C'est bon pour le micro ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Yes! <em>[testy]</em> How many people have to ask "
+#~ "me?"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Oui ! <em>[irrité]</em> Combien "
+#~ "de personnes sont sensées me demander ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "Well, I'm supposed to speak today"
+#~ msgstr "Bon, je suppose que je dois parler aujourd'hui."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[long pause]</em>"
+#~ msgstr "<em>[longue pause]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "about copyright versus community. This is too loud."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "à propos du copyright contre la Communauté. C'est trop fort."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[indicates clip-on microphone]</em>"
+#~ msgstr "<em>[il indique le micro à agrafe]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "What can I do?"
+#~ msgstr "Que puis-je faire ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "Let's see… there's no volume control…"
+#~ msgstr "Regardez… il n'y a pas de contrôle de volume…"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[finds volume control on radio microphone box]</em>"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<em>[il trouve la commande du volume sur la boîte radio du micro]</"
+#~ "em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "this seems better"
+#~ msgstr "ça paraît mieux"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "OK. Copyright versus community in the age of computer networks. The "
+#~ "principles of ethics can't change. They are the same for all situations, "
+#~ "but to apply them to any question or situation you have to look at the "
+#~ "facts of the situation to compare alternatives, you have to see what "
+#~ "their consequences are, a change in technology never changes the "
+#~ "principles of ethics, but a change in technology can alter the "
+#~ "consequences of the same choices, so it can make a difference for the "
+#~ "outcome of the question, and that has happened in the area of copyright "
+#~ "law. We have a situation where changes in technology have affected the "
+#~ "ethical factors that weigh on decisions about copyright law and change "
+#~ "the right policy for society."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "OK. Copyright contre Communauté à l'âge des ré"
+#~ "seaux informatiques. Les principes de l'éthique ne peuvent pas "
+#~ "changer. Ils restent les mêmes dans toutes les situations. Mais "
+#~ "pour qu'ils s'appliquent quelle que soit la question ou situation, vous "
+#~ "devez regarder les faits pour comparer les alternatives, et voir quelles "
+#~ "en seront les conséquences. Un changement de technologie ne change "
+#~ "jamais les principes de l'éthique, mais peut modifier ses "
+#~ "conséquences sur les mêmes choix, qui peuvent avoir des "
+#~ "résultats différents, comme cela s'est produit dans le "
+#~ "domaine des lois sur le copyright. Nous sommes dans une situation "
+#~ "où les changements de technologie ont affecté les facteurs "
+#~ "éthiques qui pèsent sur les décisions à "
+#~ "propos des lois sur le copyright et changent de politique approprié"
+#~ "e pour la société."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Laws that in the past may have been a good idea, now are harmful because "
+#~ "they are in a different context. But to explain this, I should go back to "
+#~ "the beginning to the ancient world where books were made by writing them "
+#~ "out by hand. That was the only way to do it, and anybody who could read "
+#~ "could also write a copy of a book. To be sure a slave who spent all day "
+#~ "writing copies could probably do it somewhat better than someone who "
+#~ "didn't ordinarily do that but it didn't make a tremendous difference. "
+#~ "Essentially, anyone who could read, could copy books, about as well as "
+#~ "they could be copied in any fashion."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Ces lois qui étaient par le passé une bonne idée, "
+#~ "sont maintenantnocives parce qu'elles ont changé de contexte. Pour "
+#~ "l'expliquer, ilfaudrait remonter au début du monde antique "
+#~ "où les livres étaient desœuvres écrites "
+#~ "à la main. Quand c'était la seule manière de le "
+#~ "faire.Quiconque qui pouvait lire les livres, pouvait également en "
+#~ "écrire une copie. Il est certain qu'un esclave qui passait sa "
+#~ "journée à écrire des copies était thé"
+#~ "oriquement capable de le faire mieux que quelqu'un qui n'en avait pas "
+#~ "l'habitude, mais ça ne faisait pas une énorme diffé"
+#~ "rence. Principalement, celui qui pouvait lire les livres pouvait aussi "
+#~ "les copier, et à peu près de n'importe quelle maniè"
+#~ "re."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "In the ancient world, there wasn't the sharp distinction between "
+#~ "authorship and copying that there tends to be today."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Dans l'Antiquité, il n'y avait pas d'aussi nette distinction entre "
+#~ "paternité et copie, comme c'est la tendance aujourd'hui."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "There was a continuum. On the one hand you might have somebody, say, "
+#~ "writing a play. Then you might have, on the other extreme, just somebody "
+#~ "making copies of books, but in between you might have say, somebody, who "
+#~ "say, copies part of a book, but writes some words of his own, or writing "
+#~ "a commentary, and this was very common, and definitely respected. Other "
+#~ "people would copy some bits from one book, and then some bits from "
+#~ "another book, and write something of their own words, and then copy from "
+#~ "another book, quoting passages of various lengths from many different "
+#~ "works, and then writing some other works to talk about them more, or "
+#~ "relate them. And there are many ancient works—now lost—in "
+#~ "which part of them survived in these quotations in other books that "
+#~ "became more popular than the book that the original quote <em>[came from]"
+#~ "</em>."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Il y avait un continuum. D'un côté vous pouviez avoir "
+#~ "quelqu'un qui pense, puis écrit la scène. Comme vous "
+#~ "pouviez avoir à l'autre extrême, quelqu'un qui faisait des "
+#~ "copies d'un livre. Mais entre les deux, vous pouviez avoir quelqu'un qui "
+#~ "pense, puis copie des passages d'un livre, en écrivant quelques "
+#~ "mots par lui-même, ou un commentaire, et c'était très "
+#~ "courant et certainement respecté. D'autres personnes pouvaient "
+#~ "copier certaines parties d'un livre, citer des passages de longueurs "
+#~ "variées de plusieurs travaux différents, et de là "
+#~ "construire d'autres travaux pour en parler davantage, ou s'en ré"
+#~ "férer. Et il y a beaucoup d'anciens travaux — aujourd'hui "
+#~ "perdus — dont des parties ont survécu à travers ces "
+#~ "citations dans d'autres livres, devenus plus populaires que le livre dont "
+#~ "la citation originale provenait."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "There was a spectrum between writing an original work, and copying. "
+#~ "There were many books that were partly copied, but mixed with original "
+#~ "writing. I don't believe there was any idea of copyright in the ancient "
+#~ "world and it would have been rather difficult to enforce one, because "
+#~ "books could be copied by anyone who could read anywhere, anyone who could "
+#~ "get some writing materials, and a feather to write with. So, that was a "
+#~ "rather clear simple situation."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Il y avait tout un spectre entre l'écriture d'un travail original, "
+#~ "et sa copie. Beaucoup de livres étaient partiellement copié"
+#~ "s sur d'autres, mélangés à l'écriture "
+#~ "originale. Je ne crois pas qu'il y ait eu une quelconque notion de "
+#~ "copyright dans l'antiquité. Et il aurait été "
+#~ "plutôt difficile d'en imposer une, parce que les livres pouvaient "
+#~ "être copiés par qui pouvait les lire n'importe où, et "
+#~ "qui pouvait obtenir quelque support d'écriture, et une plume pour "
+#~ "écrire avec. Ainsi, c'était une situation simple, "
+#~ "plutôt claire."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Later on, printing was developed and printing changed the situation "
+#~ "greatly. It provided a much more efficient way to make copies of books, "
+#~ "provided that they were all identical. And it required specialised, "
+#~ "fairly expensive equipment that an ordinary reader would not have. So in "
+#~ "effect it created a situation in which copies could only feasibly be made "
+#~ "by specialised businesses, of which the number was not that large. There "
+#~ "might have been hundreds of printing presses in a country and hundreds of "
+#~ "thousands, or maybe even millions of actually people who could read. So "
+#~ "the decrease in the number of places in which copies could be made was "
+#~ "tremendous."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Plus tard, l'impression fut développée et a considé"
+#~ "rablement changé la situation. Elle a fourni une manière "
+#~ "beaucoup plus efficace de faire des copies de livres, pourvu qu'elle "
+#~ "soient toutes identiques. Et elle a exigé un équipement "
+#~ "spécialisé assez cher, qu'un lecteur ordinaire ne pouvait "
+#~ "pas avoir. Elle a donc créé une situation dans laquelle les "
+#~ "copies ne pouvait être réellement faisables que par des "
+#~ "entreprises spécialisées, dont le nombre n'était pas "
+#~ "élevé. Il aurait pu y avoir des centaines d'impressions par "
+#~ "pays et des centaines de milliers, ou peut-être même "
+#~ "vraisemblablement des millions de personnes qui auraient pu les lire. "
+#~ "Ainsi la diminution du nombre d'endroits dans lesquels les copies "
+#~ "pouvaient être faites était considérable."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Now the idea of copyright developed along with the printing press. I "
+#~ "think that there may be… I think I remember reading that Venice, "
+#~ "which was a major centre of printing in the 1500s also had a kind of "
+#~ "copyright but I can't find that: I couldn't find that reference again. "
+#~ "But the system of copyright fitted in naturally with the printing press "
+#~ "because it became rare for ordinary readers to make copies. It still "
+#~ "happen. People who were very poor or very rich had handmade copies of "
+#~ "books. The very rich people did this to show off their wealth: they had "
+#~ "beautiful illuminated wealth to show that they could afford this. And "
+#~ "poor people still sometimes copied books by hand because they couldn't "
+#~ "afford printed copies. As the song goes “Time ain't money when all "
+#~ "you got is time.” So some poor people copied books with a pen. But "
+#~ "for the most part the books were all made on printing presses by "
+#~ "publishers and copyright as a system fitted in very well with the "
+#~ "technical system. For one thing it was painless for readers, because the "
+#~ "readers weren't going to make copies anyway, except for the very rich "
+#~ "ones who could presumably legitimise it, or the very poor ones who were "
+#~ "making just individual copies and no one was going to go after them with "
+#~ "lawyers. And the system was fairly easy to enforce again because there "
+#~ "were only a small number of places where it had to be enforced: only the "
+#~ "printing presses, and because of this it didn't require, it didn't "
+#~ "involve, a struggle against the public. You didn't find just about "
+#~ "everybody trying to copy books and being threatened with arrest for doing "
+#~ "it."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Maintenant, l'idée de copyright s'est développée "
+#~ "avec la presse. Je pense qu'il peut y avoir… Je pense que je me "
+#~ "rappelle avoir lu que Venise, qui était un centre important de "
+#~ "l'impression au XVIème siècle, a également connu un "
+#~ "genre de copyright mais je ne peux pas vous dire : Je ne pourrais "
+#~ "pas retrouver cette référence. Mais le système de "
+#~ "copyright s'est naturellement accordé avec la presse parce qu'il "
+#~ "est devenu rare pour un lecteur ordinaire de faire des copies. C'est "
+#~ "toujours le cas. Seuls les gens très pauvres ou très riches "
+#~ "détenaient des copies manuscrites de livres. Les gens très "
+#~ "riches le faisaient pour étaler leur richesse : il fallait "
+#~ "avoir une éblouissante fortune pour se le permettre. Et les "
+#~ "pauvres gens en étaient encore parfois à recopier les "
+#~ "livres à la main parce qu'ils ne pouvaient pas se permettre les "
+#~ "copies imprimées. Comme le dit la chanson «le temps n'est "
+#~ "pas de l'argent quand c'est tout ce que vous avez». Aussi quelques "
+#~ "pauvres gens ont copié des livres avec un stylo. Mais pour la "
+#~ "plupart, les livres étaient fabriqués à la presse "
+#~ "par des éditeurs et le copyright en tant que système s'est "
+#~ "naturellement accordé avec la technologie. D'un certain cô"
+#~ "té ce fut indolore pour les lecteurs, parce qu'ils ne faisaient de "
+#~ "toute façon plus de copie, excepté pour les gens trè"
+#~ "s riches qui pouvait réellement légitimer un tel acte, ou "
+#~ "les très pauvres qui n'en faisaient qu'un exemplaire unique et que "
+#~ "personne n'aurait poursuivi avec des avocats. Et le système fut "
+#~ "vraiment facile à imposer toujours parce qu'il n'y avait qu'un "
+#~ "très petit nombre de lieux où c'était "
+#~ "possible : seulement les presses, et parce que cela ne né"
+#~ "cessitait pas, cela n'impliquait pas de lutte contre le public. Vous ne "
+#~ "pouviez pas trouver ne serait-ce qu'une seule personne essayant de copier "
+#~ "des livres, et menacée d'être arrêtée pour "
+#~ "ça."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "And in fact, in addition to not restricting the reader's directly, it "
+#~ "didn't cause much of a problem for readers, because it might have added a "
+#~ "small fraction to the price of books but it didn't double the price, so "
+#~ "that small extra addition to the price was a very small burden for the "
+#~ "readers. The actions restricted by copyright were actions that you "
+#~ "couldn't do, as an ordinary reader, and therefore, it didn't cause a "
+#~ "problem. And because of this there was no need for harsh punishments to "
+#~ "convince readers to tolerate it and to obey."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Et en fait, en plus de ne pas limiter le lecteur directement, il n'a pas "
+#~ "vraiment causé d'ennuis, étant donné qu'il a du "
+#~ "être ajouté une petite fraction du prix du livre qui n'a "
+#~ "certes pas coûté le double, de sorte que la petite addition "
+#~ "supplémentaire au prix n'était qu'un tout petit fardeau "
+#~ "pour les lecteurs. Les actions limitées par copyright é"
+#~ "taient des actions que vous ne pouviez pas faire, en tant que lecteur "
+#~ "ordinaire, et donc, cela n'a pas posé de problème. Et pour "
+#~ "cette raison, on avait pas besoin de punir sévèrement les "
+#~ "lecteurs pour les convaincre de le tolérer et d'y obéir."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "So copyright effectively was an industrial regulation. It restricted "
+#~ "publishers and writers but it didn't restrict the general public. It was "
+#~ "somewhat like charging a fee for going on a boat ride across the "
+#~ "Atlantic. You know, it's easy to collect the fee when people are getting "
+#~ "on a boat for weeks or months."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Bien, le copyright était donc un règlement industriel. Il "
+#~ "restreignait les éditeurs et les auteurs mais ne limitait pas le "
+#~ "grand public. C'était comme faire payer un droit d'entrée "
+#~ "pour une traversée en bateau de l'Océan atlantique. Vous "
+#~ "savez, il est facile de percevoir des honoraires quand les gens prennent "
+#~ "le bateau pour des semaines, voire des mois."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Well, as time went on, printing got more efficient. Eventually even poor "
+#~ "people didn't have to bother copying books by hand and the idea sort of "
+#~ "got forgotten. I think it's in the 1800s that essentially printing got "
+#~ "cheap enough so that essentially everyone could afford printed books, so "
+#~ "to some extent the idea of poor people copying books by hand was lost "
+#~ "from memory. I heard about this about ten years ago when I started "
+#~ "talking about the subject to people."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Avec le temps, l'impression est devenue plus efficace. Par la suite, les "
+#~ "pauvres gens n'ont plus été obligés de copier les "
+#~ "livres à la main et ce genre d'idée est tombée dans "
+#~ "l'oubli. Je pense que c'est au XIXème siècle que "
+#~ "l'impression est devenue suffisamment bon marché pour que la "
+#~ "plupart ait les moyens d'acheter des livres, aussi l'idée des "
+#~ "pauvres de copier les livres à la main a été a "
+#~ "été oubliée Je n'en ai entendu parler qu'il y a dix "
+#~ "ans environ quand j'ai commencé à interroger les gens "
+#~ "à ce sujet."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "So originally in England copyright was partly intended as a measure of "
+#~ "censorship. People who wanted to publish books were required to get "
+#~ "approval from the government but the idea began to change and it a "
+#~ "different idea was expressed explicitly in the US constitution. When the "
+#~ "US constitution was written there was a proposal that authors should be "
+#~ "entitled to a monopoly on copying their books. This idea was rejected. "
+#~ "Instead, a different idea of the philosophy of copyright was put into the "
+#~ "constitution. The idea that a copyright system could be… well, the "
+#~ "idea is that people have the natural right to copy things but copyright "
+#~ "as an artificial restriction on copying can be authorised for the sake of "
+#~ "promoting progress."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "En Angleterre, à l'origine, le copyright a été en "
+#~ "partie prévu comme une mesure de censure. Les gens qui voulaient "
+#~ "publier des livres devaient obtenir l'autorisation du gouvernement, mais "
+#~ "les idées ont commencé à changer et c'est une toute "
+#~ "autre idée qui a été explicitement exprimée "
+#~ "dans la constitution des États-Unis. Quand la Constitution "
+#~ "américaine a été écrite, il a é"
+#~ "té proposé que les auteurs devaient avoir le monopole sur "
+#~ "la copie de leurs livres. Cette idée a été "
+#~ "rejetée. À la place, une idée différente de "
+#~ "celle de la philosophie du copyright a été mise dans la "
+#~ "Constitution. L'idée que le système du copyright pouvait "
+#~ "être... bon, l'idée était que les gens avaient un "
+#~ "droit naturel à copier les choses, mais le copyright en tant que "
+#~ "frein artificiel à la copie pouvait être autorisé "
+#~ "dans l'intention de favoriser le progrès."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "So the system of copyright would have been the same more or less either "
+#~ "way, but this was a statement about the purpose which is said to justify "
+#~ "copyright. It is explicitly justified as a means to promote progress, not "
+#~ "as an entitlement for copyright owners. So the system is meant to modify "
+#~ "the behaviour of copyright owners so as to benefit the public. The "
+#~ "benefit consists of more books being written and published and this is "
+#~ "intended to contribute to the progress of civilisation, to spreading "
+#~ "ideas, and as a means to this end… in other words as a means to "
+#~ "this end copyright exists. So this also thought of as a bargain between "
+#~ "the public and authors; that the public gives up its natural right to "
+#~ "make copies of anything in exchange for the progress that is brought "
+#~ "about indirectly, by encouraging more people to write."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Donc le système de copyright allait être le même d'une "
+#~ "façon ou d'une autre, mais il y avait une déclaration en "
+#~ "rapport avec ledit but pour justifier du copyright. Il est explicitement "
+#~ "justifié comme un moyen de favoriser le progrès, pas comme "
+#~ "un droit pour les propriétaires. Ainsi le système est "
+#~ "censé modifier le comportement des propriétaires de "
+#~ "copyrights pour en faire bénéficier le public. L'avantage "
+#~ "consiste à écrire et éditer plus de livres et ceci "
+#~ "dans l'intention de contribuer au progrès de la civilisation, "
+#~ "à la propagation des idées, et en tant que moyen à "
+#~ "cet effet… en d'autres termes c'est en tant que moyen à cet "
+#~ "effet que le copyright existe. Donc, c'est aussi en pensant à un "
+#~ "marché entre le public et les auteurs ; tel que le public "
+#~ "renonce à son droit naturel de faire des copies de n'importe quoi "
+#~ "en échange du progrès qui est apporté indirectement, "
+#~ "en encourageant plus de personnes à écrire."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Now it may seem like an obscure question to ask “What's the purpose "
+#~ "of copyright?” But the purpose of any activity is the most "
+#~ "important thing for deciding when an activity needs to be changed and "
+#~ "how. If you forget about the purpose you are sure to get things wrong, so "
+#~ "ever since that decision was made, the authors and especially the "
+#~ "publishers most recently have been trying to misrepresent it and sweep it "
+#~ "under the rug. There has been a campaign for decades to try to spread the "
+#~ "idea that was rejected in the US constitution. The idea that copyright "
+#~ "exists as an entitlement for copyright owners. And you can that expressed "
+#~ "in almost everything they say about it starting and ending with the word "
+#~ "“pirate” which is used to give the impression that making an "
+#~ "unauthorised copy is the moral equivalent of attacking a ship and "
+#~ "kidnapping or killing the people on board."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Maintenant il peut sembler obscur de demander « quel est le "
+#~ "but du copyright ? ». Mais connaître le but d'une "
+#~ "activité est une chose essentielle pour décider si cette "
+#~ "activité a besoin d'être changée, et comment. Si vous "
+#~ "oubliez l'objectif, vous êtes sûr de vous tromper, or depuis "
+#~ "que cette décision a été prise, les auteurs et plus "
+#~ "particulièrement les éditeurs ont jusqu'à ré"
+#~ "cemment essayé de la dénaturer et de la balayer sous le "
+#~ "tapis. Il y a eu des décennies de campagne pour tenter de ré"
+#~ "pandre l'idée qui a été rejetée dans la "
+#~ "constitution des États-Unis d'Amérique. L'idée que "
+#~ "le copyright existe en tant que droit pour les propriétaires de "
+#~ "copyrights. Et vous pouvez la retrouver dans presque tout ce qu'il disent "
+#~ "à ce sujet commençant et se terminant par le mot «"
+#~ "pirate», qui est utilisé pour donner l'impression que faire "
+#~ "une copie non autorisée est l'équivalent moral d'une "
+#~ "attaque de bateau, et du kidnapping et du meurtre des personnes à "
+#~ "bord."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "So if you look at the statements being made by publishers you find lots "
+#~ "of implicit assumptions of this sort which you have to drag into the open "
+#~ "and then start questioning."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Aussi, si vous regardez les déclarations qui sont faites par les "
+#~ "éditeurs vous trouverez un bon nombre de postulats de ce genre que "
+#~ "vous devez mettre en lumière et commencer à interroger."
+
+# type: Content of: <h3>
+#~ msgid "Recent events and problems"
+#~ msgstr "Récents événements et problèmes"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[brightens]</em>"
+#~ msgstr "<em>[il s'éclaire]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Anyway, as long as the age of the printing press continued, copyright was "
+#~ "painless, easy to enforce, and probably a good idea. But the age of the "
+#~ "printing press began changing a few decades ago when things like Xerox "
+#~ "machines and tape recorders started to be available, and more recently as "
+#~ "computer networks have come into use the situation has changed "
+#~ "drastically. We are now in a situation technologically more like the "
+#~ "ancient world, where anybody who could read something could also make a "
+#~ "copy of it that was essentially as good as the best copies anyone could "
+#~ "make."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Quoi qu'il en soit, aussi longtemps que l'âge de la presse a "
+#~ "duré, le copyright était indolore, facile à imposer, "
+#~ "et probablement une bonne idée. Mais l'âge de la presse a "
+#~ "commencé à changer il y a quelques décennies quand "
+#~ "des choses comme les photocopieurs et les magnétoscopes sont "
+#~ "devenues disponibles, et plus récemment quand les réseaux "
+#~ "informatiques sont devenus opérationnels, la situation a "
+#~ "changé de manière drastique. Nous sommes aujourd'hui dans "
+#~ "une situation technologique plus proche de l'antiquité, où "
+#~ "quiconque pouvait lire quelque chose pouvait aussi en faire une copie, "
+#~ "qui était aussi bonne que les meilleures copies de n'importe qui "
+#~ "d'autre."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[murmuring in the audience]</em>"
+#~ msgstr "<em>[murmures dans l'assistance]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "A situation now where once again, ordinary readers can make copies "
+#~ "themselves. It doesn't have to be done through centralised mass "
+#~ "production, as in the printing press. Now this change in technology "
+#~ "changes the situation in which copyright law operates. The idea of the "
+#~ "bargain was that the public trades away its natural right to make copies, "
+#~ "and in exchange gets a benefit. Well, a bargain could be a good one or a "
+#~ "bad one. It depends on the worth of what you are giving up. And the "
+#~ "worth of what you are getting. In the age of the printing press the "
+#~ "public traded away a freedom that it was unable to use."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Une situation maintenant où, à nouveau, les lecteurs "
+#~ "ordinaires peuvent faire des copies eux-même. Il n'est plus "
+#~ "nécessaire de passer par une production de masse centralisé"
+#~ "e comme dans la presse. Ce changement de technologie change la situation "
+#~ "dans laquelle la loi sur le copyright s'exerce. L'idée du "
+#~ "marché était que le public négociait son droit de "
+#~ "faire des copies, contre un avantage. Bon, une affaire peut être "
+#~ "bonne ou mauvaise. Cela dépend de la valeur de ce à quoi on "
+#~ "renonce. Et de la valeur de ce que vous obtenez. À l'âge de "
+#~ "la presse, le public a échangé une liberté dont il "
+#~ "ne pouvait pas user."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "It's like finding a way of selling shit: what have you got to lose? "
+#~ "You've got it on hand anyway, if you get something for it, it can hardly "
+#~ "be a bad deal."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "C'est comme trouver un moyen de vendre de la merde : qu'avez-vous "
+#~ "à perdre ? Vous l'avez à disposition de toute "
+#~ "manière. Si vous trouvez le moyen de la négocier, cela ne "
+#~ "peut pas être une mauvaise affaire."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[faint laughter]</em>"
+#~ msgstr "<em>[rires tièdes]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "It's like accepting money for promising not to travel to another star. "
+#~ "You're not going to do it anyway"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "C'est comme accepter de l'argent en retour de votre promesse de ne pas "
+#~ "voyager vers autre étoile. Vous n'allez pas le faire de toute "
+#~ "façon."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[hearty laughter]</em>"
+#~ msgstr "<em>[rires copieux]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "at least not in our lifetime so you might as well, if someone's going to "
+#~ "pay you to promise not to travel to another star, you might as well take "
+#~ "the deal. But if I presented you with a starship, then you might not "
+#~ "think that deal was such a good deal any more. When the thing you used to "
+#~ "sell because it was useless, you discover a use for it, then you have to "
+#~ "reconsider the desirability of those old deals that used to be "
+#~ "advantageous. Typically in a such a situation you decide that “I'm "
+#~ "not going to sell all of this any more; I'm going to keep some of it and "
+#~ "use it.” So if you were giving up a freedom that you couldn't "
+#~ "exercise and now you can exercise it, you probably want to start "
+#~ "retaining the right to exercise it at least partially. You might still "
+#~ "trade part of the freedom: and there are many alternatives of different "
+#~ "bargains which trade parts of the freedom and keep other parts. So, "
+#~ "precisely what you want to do requires thought, but in any case you want "
+#~ "to reconsider the old bargain, and you probably want to sell less of what "
+#~ "you sold in the past."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Du moins pas de notre vivant. Donc si quelqu'un vous paye pour que vous "
+#~ "promettiez de ne pas voyager vers une autre étoile, vous pouvez "
+#~ "très bien faire affaire. Mais si je m'étais pré"
+#~ "senté à vous avec un astronef, vous ne pourriez plus penser "
+#~ "que c'était une bonne affaire. Alors que vous aviez l'habitude de "
+#~ "vendre une chose inutile, vous découvrez une utilisation pour "
+#~ "elle ; vous allez donc reconsidérer les charmes des anciens "
+#~ "marchés dont vous tiriez avantage. Typiquement dans une telle "
+#~ "situation vous décidez que « je ne vais plus tout "
+#~ "vendre de ce que j'ai; je vais en garder une partie et m'en servir "
+#~ "». Aussi, si vous aviez l'habitude de troquer une liberté "
+#~ "dont vous ne pouviez rien faire, mais qu'à présent vous "
+#~ "pouvez l'exercer, vous voudrez sans doute commencer à vous "
+#~ "réserver au moins le droit de l'exercer partiellement. Vous "
+#~ "pourriez encore négocier une partie de cette liberté : "
+#~ "il y a de nombreuses alternatives aux différents marchés "
+#~ "qui échangent une partie de la liberté tout en la "
+#~ "maintenant sur d'autres plans. Ainsi, ce que vous voulez faire pré"
+#~ "cisément exige une réflexion, mais dans tous les cas vous "
+#~ "voudrez reconsidérer l'ancien marché, et probablement "
+#~ "vendre moins que ce vous vendiez auparavant."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "But the publishers are trying to do exactly the opposite. At exactly the "
+#~ "time when the public's interest is to keep part of the freedom to use it, "
+#~ "the publishers are passing laws which make us give up more freedom. You "
+#~ "see copyright was never intended to be an absolute monopoly on all the "
+#~ "uses of a copyright work. It covered some uses and not others, but in "
+#~ "recent times the publishers have been pushing to extend it further and "
+#~ "further. Ending up most recently with things like the Digital Millennium "
+#~ "Copyright Act in the US which they are also trying to turn into a treaty "
+#~ "through the World Intellectual Property Organisation which is essentially "
+#~ "an organisation representing the owners of copyrights and patents and "
+#~ "which works to try to increase their power, and pretends to be doing so "
+#~ "in the name of humanity rather than in the name of these particular "
+#~ "companies."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Or les éditeurs essayent de faire exactement l'opposé. Au "
+#~ "moment même où l'intérêt du public est de se "
+#~ "réserver une partie de liberté afin de l'exercer, les "
+#~ "éditeurs font passer des lois qui nous demandent d'y renoncer "
+#~ "davantage. Vous avez vu que le copyright n'a jamais été "
+#~ "prévu pour être un monopole absolu sur les utilisations d'un "
+#~ "travail sous copyright. Il couvrait quelques utilisations et pas "
+#~ "d'autres, mais ces derniers temps les éditeurs ont fait pression "
+#~ "pour l'étendre de plus en plus loin. Pour finir derniè"
+#~ "rement avec des choses du genre la loi sur le copyright du millénaire "
+#~ "numériqque aux États-Unis. Qu'ils essayent également de "
+#~ "transformer en traité à travers l'Organisation mondiale de "
+#~ "la propriété intellectuelle; (OMPI) qui est une "
+#~ "organisation représentée essentiellement par les "
+#~ "propriétaires de copyrights et de brevets et qui travaille "
+#~ "à augmenter leur pouvoir, en prétendant le faire au nom de "
+#~ "l'humanité plutôt qu'au nom de ces compagnies "
+#~ "particulières."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Now, what are the consequences when copyright starts restricting "
+#~ "activities that ordinary readers can do. Well, for one thing it's no "
+#~ "longer an industrial regulation. It becomes an imposition on the public. "
+#~ "For another, because of this, you find the public's starting to object to "
+#~ "it You know, when it is stopping ordinary people from doing things that "
+#~ "are natural in their lives you find ordinary people refusing to obey. "
+#~ "Which means that copyright is no longer easy to enforce and that's why "
+#~ "you see harsher and harsher punishments being adopted by governments that "
+#~ "are basically serving the publishers rather than the public."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Maintenant, qu'est-ce qui arrive lorsque le copyright commence à "
+#~ "limiter des activités que les lecteurs ordinaires peuvent "
+#~ "faire ? Et bien, d'une part cela n'est plus un règlement "
+#~ "industriel. Cela devient un impôt sur le public. D'autre part, et "
+#~ "pour cette raison, vous verrez le public commencer à s'y opposer. "
+#~ "Vous savez, quand on demande à des gens ordinaires d'arrêter "
+#~ "de faire des choses naturelles dans la vie, ils refusent d'obéir. "
+#~ "Ce qui signifie qu'il n'est plus aussi facile d'imposer le copyright et "
+#~ "c'est pourquoi vous voyez des punitions de plus en plus dures "
+#~ "adoptées par des gouvernements qui à la base servent les "
+#~ "éditeurs plutôt que le public."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Also, you have to question whether a copyright system is still "
+#~ "beneficial. Basically, the thing that we have been paying is now valuable "
+#~ "for us. Maybe the deal is a bad deal now. So all the things that made "
+#~ "technology fit in well with the technology of the printing press make it "
+#~ "fit badly with digital information technology. So, instead of like, "
+#~ "charging the fee to cross the Atlantic in a boat, it's like charging a "
+#~ "fee to cross a street. It's a big nuisance, because people cross the "
+#~ "street all along the street, and making them pay is a pain in the neck."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "En outre, vous vous demandez en quoi un système de copyright est-"
+#~ "il encore bénéfique. En fait, ce que nous avons payé "
+#~ "a maintenant de la valeur pour nous. Aussi l'affaire est-elle une "
+#~ "mauvaise affaire désormais. Et tout ce qui s'adaptait à la "
+#~ "technologie de la presse s'accorde mal avec la technologie numé"
+#~ "rique de l'information. C'est comme si au lieu de percevoir des "
+#~ "honoraires pour traverser l'Atlantique en bateau, on percevait des "
+#~ "honoraires pour traverser la rue. Et c'est très embêtant, "
+#~ "parce que les gens traversent la rue tout le long de la rue, et les faire "
+#~ "payer revient à leur casser les pieds."
+
+# type: Content of: <h3>
+#~ msgid "New kinds of copyright"
+#~ msgstr "Nouveau genre de copyright"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Now what are some of the changes we might want to make in copyright law "
+#~ "in order to adapt it to the situation that the public finds itself in? "
+#~ "Well the extreme change might be to abolish copyright law but that isn't "
+#~ "the only possible choice. There are various situations in which we could "
+#~ "reduce the power of copyright without abolishing it entirely because "
+#~ "there are various different actions that can be done with a copyright and "
+#~ "there are various situations in which you might do them, and each of "
+#~ "those is an independent question. Should copyright cover this or not? In "
+#~ "addition, there is a question of “How long?”. Copyright used "
+#~ "to be much shorter in its period or duration, and it's been extended over "
+#~ "and over again in the past fifty years or so and in fact in now appears "
+#~ "that the owners of copyrights are planning to keep on extending "
+#~ "copyrights so that they will never expire again. The US constitution says "
+#~ "that “copyright must exist for a limited time” but the "
+#~ "publishers have found a way around this: every twenty years they make "
+#~ "copyright twenty years longer, and this way, no copyright will ever "
+#~ "expire again. Now a thousand years from now, copyright might last for "
+#~ "1200 years, just basically enough so that copyright on Mickey Mouse can "
+#~ "not expire."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Maintenant quels sont les changements que nous pourrions faire valoir "
+#~ "dans la loi sur le copyright pour l'adapter à la situation dans "
+#~ "laquelle le public se trouve ? Un changement radical pourrait ê"
+#~ "tre de supprimer la loi sur le copyright mais ce n'est pas le seul choix "
+#~ "possible. Il y a diverses situations dans lesquelles nous pourrions "
+#~ "réduire la puissance du copyright sans la supprimer totalement, "
+#~ "parce qu'il y a plusieurs actions différentes qui pourraient "
+#~ "être menées avec le copyright et il y a diverses situations "
+#~ "dans lesquelles vous pourriez le faire, et chacune d'entre elles est une "
+#~ "question indépendante. Le copyright pourrait-il les couvrir ou "
+#~ "non ? En outre, il y a la question de savoir « pour "
+#~ "combien de temps ? ». Le copyright était à "
+#~ "l'époque beaucoup plus court dans sa période ou sa "
+#~ "durée, et il a été prolongé à "
+#~ "plusieurs reprises pendant les cinquante dernières années "
+#~ "et il paraît de plus en plus clairement que les proprié"
+#~ "taires de copyright projettent de maintenir l'extension des copyrights "
+#~ "jusqu'à ce qu'ils n'expirent plus jamais. La constitution des "
+#~ "États-Unis d'Amérique indique que le « copyright "
+#~ "doit exister pour un temps limité » mais les é"
+#~ "diteurs ont trouvé une manière de le contourner : tous "
+#~ "les vingt ans ils le prolongent de vingt ans, et de cette façon, "
+#~ "aucun copyright n'expirera plus jamais. Maintenant, dans mille ans, le "
+#~ "copyright pourrait durer 1200 années, en fait juste assez pour que "
+#~ "le copyright sur la souris Mickey ne puisse plus expirer."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Because that's why, people believe that US Congress passed a law to "
+#~ "extend copyright for twenty years. Disney was paying them, and paying the "
+#~ "President too, with campaign funds of course, to make it lawful. See, if "
+#~ "they just gave them cash it would be a crime, but contributing indirectly "
+#~ "to campaigns is legal and that's what they do: to buy the legislators. So "
+#~ "they passed the Sunny Bono copyright act. Now this is interesting: Sunny "
+#~ "Bono was a congressman and a member of the Church of Scientology, which "
+#~ "uses copyrights to suppress knowledge of its activities. So they have "
+#~ "their pet congressman and they pushed very hard for increased copyright "
+#~ "powers."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "C'est pourquoi, les gens croient que le Congrès américain a "
+#~ "passéune loi pour prolonger le copyright pendant vingt ans. Disney "
+#~ "les apayés, et a payé le Président aussi, avec les "
+#~ "fonds de campagneévidemment, pour rendre ça légal. "
+#~ "Voyez-vous, s'ils avaient juste payé enliquide, cela aurait "
+#~ "été un crime, mais contribuer indirectement auxcampagnes "
+#~ "est légal et c'est ce qu'ils font : acheter les lé"
+#~ "gislateurs.Aussi ils ont adopté la loi «Sunny Bono» "
+#~ "sur le copyright. Maintenant ce qui est intéressant, c'est que "
+#~ "Sunny Bono était un membre du Congrès et un membre de "
+#~ "l'Église de Scientologie, qui utilisait le copyright pour "
+#~ "supprimer les informations sur ses activités. Ainsi, ils ont leur "
+#~ "petit chouchou au Congrès et ont poussé très fort "
+#~ "pour accroître les pouvoirs du copyright."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Anyway, we were fortunate that Sunny Bono died but in his name they "
+#~ "passed the Mickey Mouse Copyright Act of 1998 I believe. It's being "
+#~ "challenged by the way, on the grounds that, there is a legal case that "
+#~ "people hope to go to the Supreme Court and have the extension of old "
+#~ "copyrights tossed out. In any case, there are all these different "
+#~ "situations and questions where we could reduce the scope of copyright."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Quoi qu'il en soit, nous avons eu la chance que Sunny Bono soit mort, "
+#~ "mais en son nom ils ont passé la Loi sur le copyright de la souris "
+#~ "Mickey, en 1998 je crois. C'est remis en question cela dit, en raison de "
+#~ "l'existence d'une possibilité juridique de voir par la Cour "
+#~ "Suprême les demandes d'extension de vieux droits rejetées. "
+#~ "Dans tous les cas, il y a des tas de situations et questions diffé"
+#~ "rentes où nous pourrions réduire la portée du "
+#~ "copyright."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "So what are some of them? Well, first of all there are various different "
+#~ "contexts for copying. There is commercial sale of copies in the stores at "
+#~ "one extreme and at the other there is privately making a copy for your "
+#~ "friend once in a while, and in between there are other things, like, "
+#~ "there's broadcasting on TV or the radio, there's posting it on the "
+#~ "website, there's handing it out to all the people in an organisation, and "
+#~ "some of these things could be done either commercially or non-"
+#~ "commercially. You know, you could imagine a company handing out copies to "
+#~ "its staff or you could imagine a school doing it, or some private, non-"
+#~ "profit organisation doing it. Different situations, and we don't have to "
+#~ "treat them all the same. So one way in we could reclaim the… in "
+#~ "general though, the activities that are the most private are those that "
+#~ "are most crucial to our freedom and our way of life, whereas the most "
+#~ "public and commercial are those that are most useful for providing some "
+#~ "sort of income for authors so it's a natural situation for a compromise "
+#~ "in which the limits of copyright are put somewhere in the middle so that "
+#~ "a substantial part of the activity still is covered and provides an "
+#~ "income for authors, while the activities that are most directly relevant "
+#~ "to peoples' private lives become free again. And this is the sort of "
+#~ "thing that I propose doing with copyright for things such as novels and "
+#~ "biographies and memoires and essays and so on. That at the very minimum, "
+#~ "people should always have a right to share a copy with a friend. It's "
+#~ "when governments have to prevent that kind of activity that they have to "
+#~ "start intruding into everyone's lives and using harsh punishments. The "
+#~ "only way basically to stop people in their private lives from sharing is "
+#~ "with a police state, but public commercial activities can be regulated "
+#~ "much more easily and much more painlessly."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Quels sont-ils pour certains ? Et bien tout d'abord, il y a "
+#~ "plusieurs contextes différents pour la copie. Il y a la vente "
+#~ "commerciale de copies dans des magasins à d'un côté, "
+#~ "et de l'autre il y a la copie privée pour un ami de temps à "
+#~ "autre, et entre les deux il y a d'autres choses comme sa radio- ou "
+#~ "télé-diffusion, son placement sur un site web, sa "
+#~ "distribution collective dans une organisation, et toutes ces choses que "
+#~ "l'on peut faire de façon commerciale ou non-commerciale. Vous "
+#~ "savez, vous pouvez imaginer une entreprise qui distribue des copies "
+#~ "à son équipe ou vous pouvez encore imaginer une é"
+#~ "cole, ou quelque organisation privée, non-commerciale le faire. "
+#~ "Différentes situations que nous n'avons pas à traiter "
+#~ "toutes de la même manière. Aussi la façon dont nous "
+#~ "pourrions récupérer le... comme en général, "
+#~ "les activités qui sont les plus intimes sont les plus importantes "
+#~ "pour notre liberté et notre façon de vivre, et que les plus "
+#~ "publiques et commerciales sont les plus utiles à fournir un "
+#~ "certain type de revenus pour les auteurs, il y a une situation naturelle "
+#~ "de compromis dans lequel les limites du copyright sont posées "
+#~ "quelquepart au milieu, de sorte qu'une part substantielle de "
+#~ "l'activité reste couverte et fournisse toujours un revenu pour les "
+#~ "auteurs, pendant que celle qui relève le plus directement de la "
+#~ "vie privée des gens redevient libre. Et c'est ce genre de chose "
+#~ "que je propose de faire avec le copyright pour des choses comme les "
+#~ "romans, les biographies, les mémoires, les essais, etc. Qu'au "
+#~ "strict minimum, les gens aient toujours le droit de partager une copie "
+#~ "avec un ami. C'est quand les gouvernements ont à empêcher ce "
+#~ "genre d'activité qu'ils commencent à s'introduire dans la "
+#~ "vie privée des gens et user de punitions sévères. La "
+#~ "seule façon d'empêcher les gens de partager dans leur vie "
+#~ "privée c'est avec un état policier, mais des activité"
+#~ "s commerciales et publiques peuvent être réglées de "
+#~ "façon beaucoup plus efficace et indolore."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Now, where we should draw these lines depends, I believe, on the kind of "
+#~ "work. Different works serve different purposes for their users. Until "
+#~ "today we've had a copyright system that treats almost everything exactly "
+#~ "alike except for music: there are a lot of legal exceptions for music. "
+#~ "But there's no reason why we have to elevate simplicity above the "
+#~ "practical consequences. We can treat different kinds of works "
+#~ "differently. I propose a classification broadly into three kinds of "
+#~ "works: functional works, works that express personal position, and works "
+#~ "that are fundamentally aesthetic."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Maintenant, l'endroit où nous pourrions tracer ces limites "
+#~ "dépend, je crois, du style de travail. Différents travaux "
+#~ "répondent à différents besoinspour leurs "
+#~ "utilisateurs. Jusqu'à aujourd'hui nous avons eu un système "
+#~ "de copyright qui traitait presque tout de la même manière "
+#~ "excepté la musique : il y a beaucoup d'exceptions juridiques "
+#~ "pour la musique. Mais il n'y a aucune raison de placer la "
+#~ "simplicité au dessus des conséquences pratiques. Nous "
+#~ "pouvons traiter les différents types de travaux diffé"
+#~ "remment. Je propose une classification généralement dans "
+#~ "trois types de travaux : les travaux fonctionnels, les travaux qui "
+#~ "expriment la position personnelle et les travaux fondamentalement "
+#~ "esthétiques."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Functional works include: computer software; recipes; textbooks; "
+#~ "dictionaries and other reference works; anything that you use to get jobs "
+#~ "done. For functional works I believe that people need very broad freedom, "
+#~ "including the freedom to publish modified versions. So everything I am "
+#~ "going to say tomorrow about computer software applies to other kinds of "
+#~ "functional works in the same way. So, this criterion of free… "
+#~ "because it necessary to have the freedom to publish a modified version "
+#~ "this means we have to almost completely get rid of copyright but the free "
+#~ "software movement is showing that the progress that society wants that is "
+#~ "supposedly the justification for society having copyright can happen in "
+#~ "other ways. We don't have to give up these important freedoms to have "
+#~ "progress. Now the publishers are always asking us to presuppose that "
+#~ "their there is no way to get progress without giving up our crucial "
+#~ "freedoms and the most important thing I think about the free software "
+#~ "movement is to show them that their pre-supposition is unjustified."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Les travaux fonctionnels incluent : les logiciels "
+#~ "d'ordinateur ; les recettes ; les manuels ; les "
+#~ "dictionnaires et autres travaux de référence ; tout ce "
+#~ "que vous utilisez pour que le travail soit fait. Pour les travaux "
+#~ "fonctionnels, je pense que les gens ont besoin d'une liberté "
+#~ "très large, y compris la liberté de publier des versions "
+#~ "modifiées. Aussi tout ce que je dirais demain à propos des "
+#~ "logiciels d'ordinateur s'applique de façon identique aux autres "
+#~ "genres de travaux fontionnels. Ainsi, ce critère de libre... "
+#~ "parce qu'il est nécessaire d'avoir la liberté de publier "
+#~ "une version modifiée. Cela signifie que nous devons nous dé"
+#~ "barrasser presque totalement du copyright. Mais le mouvement du logiciel "
+#~ "libre est en train de prouver que le progrès que la socié"
+#~ "té veut, la soi-disant justification du copyright, peut arriver "
+#~ "d'une autre manière. Nous n'avons pas à renoncer à "
+#~ "ces importantes libertés pour avoir le progrès. "
+#~ "Aujourd'hui, les éditeurs nous demandent toujours de pré"
+#~ "supposer qu'il n'y a aucune possibilité de progrès sans "
+#~ "renoncer à ces libertés fondamentales. Et la chose la plus "
+#~ "importante, je pense, pour le mouvement du logiciel libre est de prouver "
+#~ "que leur présuppositions sont injustifiées."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "I can't say I'm sure that in all of these areas we can't produce progress "
+#~ "without copyright restrictions stopping people, but what we've shown is "
+#~ "that we've got a chance: it's not a ridiculous idea. It shouldn't be "
+#~ "dismissed. The public should not suppose that the only way to get "
+#~ "progress is to have copyright but even for these kinds of works there can "
+#~ "be some kinds of compromise copyright systems that are consistent with "
+#~ "giving people the freedom to publish modified versions. Look, for "
+#~ "example, at the GNU free documentation license, which is used to make a "
+#~ "book free. It allows anyone to make and sell copies of a modified "
+#~ "version, but it requires giving credit in certain ways to the original "
+#~ "authors and publishers in a way that can give them a commercial advantage "
+#~ "and thus I believe make it possible to have commercial publishing of free "
+#~ "textbooks, and if this works people are just beginning to try it "
+#~ "commercially. The Free Software Foundation has been selling lots of "
+#~ "copies of various free books for almost fifteen years now and it's been "
+#~ "successful for us. At this point though, commercial publishers are just "
+#~ "beginning to try this particular approach, but I think that even for "
+#~ "functional works where the freedom to publish modified works is "
+#~ "essential, some kind of compromise copyright system can be worked out, "
+#~ "which permits everyone that freedom."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Je ne peux pas dire que je suis sûr que dans tous ces domaines on ne peut
"
+#~ "pas apporter de progrès sans restriction de copyright pour bloquer les "
+#~ "gens, mais ce que nous avons prouvé c'est que nous avons une "
+#~ "chance : ce n'est pas une idée ridicule. Elle ne devrait pas être "
+#~ "écartée. Le public ne devrait pas supposer que la seule façon d'obtenir
"
+#~ "le progrès est d'avoir du copyright. Mais même pour ce genre de travaux "
+#~ "il peut y avoir quelques types de compromis avec le système de copyright,
"
+#~ "compatibles avec le fait de donner aux gens la liberté de publier des "
+#~ "versions modifiées. Regardez par exemple, la documentation libre de la "
+#~ "licence GNU utilisée pour fabriquer un livre libre. Elle permet à "
+#~ "n'importe qui de faire et de vendre des copies d'une version modifiée, "
+#~ "mais elle exige de donner du crédit d'une certaine manière aux auteurs
et "
+#~ "éditeurs d'origine d'une façon qui leur donne un avantage commercial, et
"
+#~ "ainsi je crois rendre possible la publication commerciale des manuels "
+#~ "libres. Et ça fonctionne, les gens commencent tout juste à l'essayer "
+#~ "commercialement. La Free Software Foundation a vendu un bon nombre de "
+#~ "copies de divers livres libres pendant presque quinze ans maintenant, et "
+#~ "cela a été un succès pour nous. En ce moment, cependant, les éditeurs "
+#~ "commerciaux commencent tout juste à essayer cette approche particulière,
"
+#~ "mais je crois que même pour ces travaux fonctionnels où la liberté de "
+#~ "publier des travaux modifiés est essentielle, un certain genre de "
+#~ "compromis avec le système de copyright peut être trouvé, qui permet à "
+#~ "chacun cette liberté."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "For other kinds of works, the ethical questions apply differently, "
+#~ "because the works are used differently. The second category of works is "
+#~ "works that express someone's positions or views or experiences. For "
+#~ "example, essays, offers to do business with people, statements of one's "
+#~ "legal position, memoirs, anything that says, whose point is to say what "
+#~ "you think or you want or what you like. Book reviews and restaurant "
+#~ "reviews are also in this category: it's expressing a personal opinion or "
+#~ "position. Now for these kinds of works, making a modified version is not "
+#~ "a useful thing to do. So I see no reason why people should need to have "
+#~ "the freedom to publish modified versions of these works. Verbatim copying "
+#~ "is the only thing that people need to have the freedom to do and because "
+#~ "of this we can consider the idea that the freedom to distribute copies "
+#~ "should only apply in some situations, for example if it were limited to "
+#~ "non-commercial distribution that would be OK I think. Ordinary citizen's "
+#~ "lives would no longer be restricted but publishers would still be covered "
+#~ "by copyright for these things."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Pour d'autres genres de travaux, les questions d'éthique "
+#~ "s'appliquent différemment, parce que les travaux sont "
+#~ "utilisés différemment. La seconde catégorie de "
+#~ "travaux est celle des travaux qui expriment la position de quelqu'un ou "
+#~ "ses points de vue ou ses expériences. Par exemple, essais, "
+#~ "propositions d'affaires, déclarations de sa situation lé"
+#~ "gale, mémoires, tout ce qui est dit, dont la question est de dire "
+#~ "ce que vous pensez ou ce que vous aimez. Les revues littéraires, "
+#~ "les revues hôtelières sont aussi dans cette caté"
+#~ "gorie : ils expriment une opinion personnelle, un point de vue. "
+#~ "Maintenant pour ce genre de travaux, faire une version modifiée "
+#~ "n'est pas une chose utile. Aussi, je ne vois pas de raison à ce "
+#~ "que les gens aient la liberté de publier des versions "
+#~ "modifiées de ces travaux. La copie intégrale est la seule "
+#~ "chose que les gens ont besoin d'avoir la liberté de faire et pour "
+#~ "cette raison nous pouvons considérer l'idée que la "
+#~ "liberté de distribuer des copies ne devrait s'appliquer que dans "
+#~ "certaines situations, par exemple si c'était limité "
+#~ "à la distribution non-commerciale ce serait pas mal, je pense. La "
+#~ "vie des citoyens ordinaires ne serait plus restreinte, mais les é"
+#~ "diteurs voudraient être encore couvert par le copyright pour "
+#~ "ça."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[drinks water]</em>"
+#~ msgstr "<em>[il boit de l'eau]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Now, I used to think that maybe it would be good enough to allow people "
+#~ "to privately redistribute copies occasionally. I used to think that maybe "
+#~ "it would be OK if all public redistribution were still restricted by "
+#~ "copyright for these works but the experience with Napster has convinced "
+#~ "me that that's not so. And the reason is that it shows that lots and lots "
+#~ "of people both want to publicly redistribute—publicly but not "
+#~ "commercially redistribute—and it's very useful. And if it's so "
+#~ "useful, then it's wrong to stop people from doing it. But it would still "
+#~ "be acceptable I think, to restrict commercial redistribution of this "
+#~ "work, because that would just be an industrial regulation and it wouldn't "
+#~ "block the useful activities that people should be doing with these works."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Maintenant, je pensais que peut-être il serait suffisant de "
+#~ "permettre aux gens de redistribuer en privé des copies à "
+#~ "l'occasion. Je pensais que peut-être ça serait pas mal si "
+#~ "toutes les redistributions publiques étaient encore limité"
+#~ "es par copyright pour ce genre de travaux, mais l'expérience avec "
+#~ "Napster m'a convaincu que non. Et la raison est que cela montre que "
+#~ "beaucoup, beaucoup de gens veulent redistribuer de façon publique "
+#~ "— redistribuer publiquement mais pas commercialement — et "
+#~ "c'est très utile. Et si c'est si utile, c'est une erreur "
+#~ "d'arrêter les gens de le faire. Mais cela serait encore acceptable "
+#~ "je pense, de limiter la redistribution commerciale de ces travaux, parce "
+#~ "que cela serait juste une régulation industrielle et ça ne "
+#~ "bloquerait pas les activités utiles que les gens devraient faire "
+#~ "avec ces travaux."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Oh, also, scientific papers. Or scholarly papers in general fall into "
+#~ "this category because publishing modified versions of them is not a good "
+#~ "thing to do: it's falsifying the record so they should only be "
+#~ "distributed verbatim, so scientific papers should be freely "
+#~ "redistributable by anyone because we should be encouraging their "
+#~ "redistribution, and I hope you will never agree to publish a scientific "
+#~ "paper in a way that restricts verbatim redistribution on the net. Tell "
+#~ "the journal that you won't do that."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Ah, aussi, les documents scientifiques, ou les documents érudits "
+#~ "en général tombent dans cette catégorie parce que la "
+#~ "publication de leurs versions modifiées n'est pas une bonne chose "
+#~ "à faire : cela fausse le registre; elles devraient donc "
+#~ "être distribuées uniquement dans leur inté"
+#~ "gralité. Ainsi les documents scientifiques devraient être "
+#~ "redistributable librement par n'importe qui parce que nous devrions "
+#~ "encourager leur redistribution, et j'espère que vous n'accepterez "
+#~ "jamais de publier un document scientifique d'une façon qui "
+#~ "limiterait sa redistribution intégrale sur le net. Dites au "
+#~ "journal que vous ne ferez pas cela."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Because scientific journals have become an obstacle to the dissemination "
+#~ "of scientific results. They used to be a necessary mechanism. Now they "
+#~ "are nothing but an obstruction, and those journals that restrict access "
+#~ "and restrict redistribution <em>[emphasis]</em> must be abolished. They "
+#~ "are the enemies of the dissemination of knowledge; they are the enemies "
+#~ "of science, and this practice must come to an end."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Parce que les journaux scientifiques sont devenus un obstacle à la "
+#~ "diffusion des résultats scientifiques. Ils étaient un "
+#~ "mécanisme nécessaire. Maintenant ils ne sont rien d'autre "
+#~ "qu'une obstruction. Et ces journaux qui limitent l'accès et "
+#~ "limitent la redistribution <em>[insistance]</em> doivent être "
+#~ "supprimés. Ils sont les ennemis de la diffusion de la "
+#~ "connaissance; ils sont les ennemis de la science, et cette pratique doit "
+#~ "cesser."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Now there is a third category of works, which is aesthetic works, whose "
+#~ "main use is to be appreciated; novels, plays, poems, drawings in many "
+#~ "cases, typically and most music. Typically it's made to be appreciated. "
+#~ "Now, they're not functional people don't have the need to modify and "
+#~ "improve them, the way people have the need to do that with functional "
+#~ "works. So it's a difficult question: is it vital for people to have the "
+#~ "freedom to publish modified versions of an aesthetic work. On the one "
+#~ "hand you have authors with a lot of ego attachment saying"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Il y a maintenant une troisième catégorie de travaux, qui "
+#~ "est celle des travaux esthétiques, dont l'utilisation principale "
+#~ "est d'être appréciée: romans, jeux, poésies, "
+#~ "graphismes dans beaucoup de cas, et musiques pour la plupart. C'est "
+#~ "typiquement fait pour être apprécié. Maintenant, ils "
+#~ "ne sont pas fonctionnels; les gens n'ont pas la nécessité "
+#~ "de les modifier et de les améliorer, comme c'est nécessaire "
+#~ "avec les travaux fonctionnels. Aussi c'est une question difficile : "
+#~ "il est essentiel pour les gens d'avoir la liberté de publier des "
+#~ "versions modifiées d'un travail esthétique. D'une part vous "
+#~ "avez des auteurs qui font preuve de pas mal d'égotisme."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[English accent, dramatic gesture]</em>"
+#~ msgstr "<em>[accent anglais, gestuelle dramatique]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "“Oh this is my creation.”"
+#~ msgstr "« Oh, c'est ma création. »"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[Back to Boston]</em>"
+#~ msgstr "<em>[retour à Boston]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "“How dare anyone change a line of this?” On the other hand "
+#~ "you have the folk process which shows that a series of people "
+#~ "sequentially modifying the work or maybe even in parallel and then "
+#~ "comparing versions can produce something tremendously rich, and not only "
+#~ "beautiful songs and short poems, but even long epics have been produced "
+#~ "in this way, and there was a time back before the mystique of the artist "
+#~ "as creator, semi-divine figure was so powerful when even great writers "
+#~ "reworked stories that had been written by others. Some of the plays of "
+#~ "Shakespeare involve stories that were taken from other plays written "
+#~ "often a few decades before. If today's copyright laws had been in effect "
+#~ "they would have called Shakespeare a quote pirate unquote for writing "
+#~ "some of his great work and so of course you would have had the other "
+#~ "authors saying"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "« Qui oserait en changer une ligne ? ». De "
+#~ "l'autre côté, vous avez le processus folklorique qui prouve "
+#~ "qu'une série de personnes modifiant un travail de façon "
+#~ "séquentielle, ou peut-être même en parallèle et "
+#~ "en comparant alors les versions, peut produire quelque chose d'extrê"
+#~ "mement riche. Et non seulement de belles chansons et de courtes poé"
+#~ "sies, mais même de longues épopées ont é"
+#~ "té produites de cette façon. Il y eût un temps "
+#~ "déjà, avant que la mystique de l'artiste créateur "
+#~ "— figure semi-divine — ait tant de pouvoir, où mê"
+#~ "me de grands écrivains ont retouché des histoires qui "
+#~ "avaient été écrites par d'autres. Certaines "
+#~ "scènes de Shakespeare nouent des intrigues qui ont é"
+#~ "té tirées de scènes écrites souvent plusieurs "
+#~ "décennies auparavant. Si les lois contemporaines sur le copyright "
+#~ "avaient été effectives, ils auraient appellé "
+#~ "Shakespeare entre guillemets : « pirate » pour "
+#~ "avoir écrit ainsi une partie de son immense travail, et é"
+#~ "videmment vous auriez eu les dires des autres auteurs."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[English accent]</em>"
+#~ msgstr "<em>[accent anglais]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "“How dare he change one line of my creation. He couldn't possibly "
+#~ "make it better.“"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "« Comment ose-t-il changer une ligne de ma création. Il "
+#~ "est impossible de le faire mieux. »"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[faint audience chuckle]</em>"
+#~ msgstr "<em>[faible brouhaha de l'assistance]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "You'll hear people ridiculing this idea in exactly those terms. Well, I "
+#~ "am not sure what we should do about publishing modified versions of these "
+#~ "aesthetic works. One possibility is to do something like what is done in "
+#~ "music, which is anyone's allowed to rearranged and play a piece of music, "
+#~ "but they may have to pay for doing so, but they don't have to ask "
+#~ "permission to perform it. Perhaps for commercial publication of these "
+#~ "works, either modified or unmodified, if they're making money they might "
+#~ "have to pay some money, that's one possibility. It's a difficult "
+#~ "question what to do about publishing modified versions of these aesthetic "
+#~ "works and I don't have an answer that I'm fully satisfied with."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Vous entendrez des personnes ridiculiser l'idée exactement dans "
+#~ "ces termes. Bien. Je ne suis pas sûr de ce que nous pourrions faire "
+#~ "à propos de la publication de versions modifiées des "
+#~ "travaux esthétiques. Une des possibilités est de faire "
+#~ "comme ce qui est fait en musique, où n'importe qui peut en "
+#~ "réarranger et jouer un morceau. Ils peuvent avoir à payer "
+#~ "pour ça, mais ils n'ont pas à demander la permission de "
+#~ "l'exécuter. Peut-être que pour la publication commmerciale "
+#~ "de ces travaux, modifiés ou non, s'ils font de l'argent avec, ils "
+#~ "pourraient devoir payer une certaine somme d'argent. C'est une "
+#~ "possibilité. C'est une question difficile de savoir quoi faire au "
+#~ "sujet de la publication de versions modifiées de ces travaux "
+#~ "esthétiques, et je n'ai pas de réponse dont je suis "
+#~ "entièrement satisfait."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>Audience member 1 (AM1)</strong>, question, inaudible"
+#~ msgstr "Un membre de l'audience pose une question (MA1), inaudible."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Let me repeat the question because he said it so "
+#~ "fast you couldn't possibly have understood it. He said “What kind "
+#~ "of category should computer games go in?” Well, I would say that "
+#~ "the game engine is functional and the game scenario is aesthetic."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Laissez-moi répéter la question "
+#~ "parce qu'il l'a dite tellement vite que vous ne pouviez pas l'avoir "
+#~ "comprise. Il a dit « dans quel genre de catégorie "
+#~ "rentrent les jeux d'ordinateur ? » Bien, je dirais que le "
+#~ "moteur de jeu est fonctionnel et que le scénario est esthé"
+#~ "tique."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>AM1</strong>: Graphics?"
+#~ msgstr "<strong>MA1</strong> : Et les graphismes ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Those are part of the scenario probably. The "
+#~ "specific pictures are part of the scenario; they are aesthetic, whereas "
+#~ "the software for displaying the scenes is functional. So I would say that "
+#~ "if they combine the aesthetic and the functional into one seamless thing "
+#~ "then the software should be treated as functional, but if they're willing "
+#~ "to separate the engine and the scenario then it would be legitimate to "
+#~ "say, well the engine is functional but the scenario is aesthetic."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Ceux-ci font probablement partie du scé"
+#~ "nario. Les images spécifiques font partie du scénario; "
+#~ "elles sont esthétiques, tandis que le logiciel pour visualiser les "
+#~ "scènes est fonctionnel. Ainsi je dirais que si elles combinent "
+#~ "l'esthétique et le fonctionnel en une seule et même chose "
+#~ "continue, alors le logiciel est traité comme fonctionnel. Mais si "
+#~ "ellessont disposées à séparer la machine et le "
+#~ "scénario alors il serait légitime de dire, bien, que la "
+#~ "machine est fonctionnelle mais le scénario esthétique."
+
+# type: Content of: <h3>
+#~ msgid "Copyright: possible solutions"
+#~ msgstr "Copyright : les solutions possibles"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Now, how long should copyright last? Well, nowadays the tendency in "
+#~ "publishing is for books to go out of copyright faster and faster. Today "
+#~ "in the US most books that are published are out of print within three "
+#~ "years. They've been remaindered and they're gone. So it's clear that "
+#~ "there's not real need for copyright to last for say 95 years: it's "
+#~ "ridiculous. In fact, it's clear that ten year copyright would be "
+#~ "sufficient to keep the activity of publishing going. But it should be ten "
+#~ "years from date of publication, but it would make sense to allow an "
+#~ "additional period before publication which could even be longer than ten "
+#~ "years which as you see, as long as the book has not been published the "
+#~ "copyright on it is not restricting the public. It's basically just giving "
+#~ "the author to have it published eventually but I think that once the book "
+#~ "is published copyright should run for some ten years or so, then that's "
+#~ "it."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Maintenant, combien de temps le copyright devrait-il durer ? Et bien "
+#~ "de nos jours la tendance dans l'édition est, en ce qui concerne "
+#~ "les livres, de s'éloigner du copyright de plus en plus vite. "
+#~ "Aujourd'hui aux USA la plupart des livres qui sont édités "
+#~ "sortent du circuit de l'impression en moins de trois ans. Ils ont é"
+#~ "té soldés et se retirent de la vente. Ainsi il est clair "
+#~ "qu'on a réellement besoin que le copyright dure 95 ans par "
+#~ "exemple : c'est ridicule. En fait, il est clair qu'un copyright de "
+#~ "dix ans serait suffisant pour que l'activité de l'édition "
+#~ "tienne le coup. Mais dix ans à partir de la date de publication. "
+#~ "On comprendrait que puisse être accordée une période "
+#~ "additionnelle avant la publication, ce qui pourrait faire plus long que "
+#~ "dix ans ; comme vous le voyez aussi longtemps que le livre n'a pas "
+#~ "été édité, le copyright sur lui ne limite pas "
+#~ "le public. C'est juste à la base pour l'auteur le temps qu'il soit "
+#~ "édité. Mais je pense qu'une fois que le livre est é"
+#~ "dité, le copyright devrait fonctionner pendant environ dix ans et "
+#~ "c'est tout."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Now, I once proposed this in a panel where the other people were all "
+#~ "writers. And one of them said: “Ten year copyright? Why that's "
+#~ "ridiculous! Anything more than five years is intolerable.” He was "
+#~ "an awardwinning science fiction writer who was complaining about the "
+#~ "difficulty of retrouving, of pulling back, this is funny, French words "
+#~ "are leaking into my English, of, of regaining the rights from the "
+#~ "publisher who'd let his books go out of print for practical purposes but "
+#~ "was dragging his heels about obeying the contract, which says that when "
+#~ "the book is out of print the rights revert to the author."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Maintenant, j'ai proposé ça une fois dans un débat "
+#~ "où les autres personnes étaient toutes des auteurs. Et l'un "
+#~ "d'entre eux a dit : « dix ans de copyright ? "
+#~ "Pourquoi c'est ridicule ! Quelque chose de plus de cinq ans est "
+#~ "intolérable. » C'était un auteur de science-"
+#~ "fiction récompensé, qui se plaignait des problèmes "
+#~ "du retrouving , du retrait — c'est drôle, des mots "
+#~ "de français s'infiltrent dans mon anglais — de, de regagner "
+#~ "les droits de l'éditeur quand celui-ci a laissé les livres "
+#~ "sortir du circuit de l'impression pour des raisons pratiques mais qui "
+#~ "traîne des pieds pour obéir au contrat, qui stipule que "
+#~ "quand le livre est sorti, les droits retournent à l'auteur."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "The publishers treat authors terribly you have to realise. They're always "
+#~ "demanding more power in the name of the authors and they will bring along "
+#~ "a few very famous very successful writers who have so much clout that "
+#~ "they can get contracts that treat them very well to testify saying that "
+#~ "the power is really for their sake. Meanwhile most writers who are not "
+#~ "famous and are not rich and have no particular clout are being treated "
+#~ "horribly by the publishing industry, and it's even worse in music. I "
+#~ "recommend all of you to read Courtney Love's article: it's in Salon "
+#~ "magazine right?"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Les éditeurs traitent les auteurs d'une façon terrible il "
+#~ "faut le savoir. Ils exigent toujours plus de pouvoir au nom des auteurs "
+#~ "et ils apporteront un petit nombre d'auteurs à gros succès, "
+#~ "très connus, qui ont tellement le bras long qu'ils peuvent obtenir "
+#~ "des contrats qui les traitent très bien pour confirmer les dires "
+#~ "comme quoi le pouvoir est vraiment dans leur intérêt. En "
+#~ "attendant la plupart des auteurs qui ne sont pas célèbres, "
+#~ "ne sont pas riches et n'ont pas de relations particulières, sont "
+#~ "traités de façon horrible par l'industrie de l'é"
+#~ "dition, et c'est encore pire dans la musique. Je recommande à tous "
+#~ "de lire l'article de Courtney Love's : il est dans Salon magazine, "
+#~ "c'est ça ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>AM2</strong> (Audience member 2) Yes"
+#~ msgstr "<strong>MA2</strong> : (Membre de l'audience 2) Oui"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: She started out by calling the record companies "
+#~ "quote pirates unquotes because of the way they treat the musicians. In "
+#~ "any case we can shorten copyright more or less. We could try various "
+#~ "lengths, we could see, we could find out empirically what length of "
+#~ "copyright is needed to keep publication vigourous. I would say that since "
+#~ "almost books are out of print by ten years, clearly ten years should be "
+#~ "long enough. But it doesn't have to be the same for every kind of work. "
+#~ "For example, maybe some aspects of copyright for movies should last for "
+#~ "longer, like the rights to sell all the paraphernalia with the pictures "
+#~ "and characters on them. You know, that's so crassly commercial it hardly "
+#~ "matters if that is limited to one company in most cases. Maybe the "
+#~ "copyright on the movies themselves, maybe that's legitimate for that to "
+#~ "last twenty years. Meanwhile for software, I suspect that a three year "
+#~ "copyright would be enough. you see if each version of the programme "
+#~ "remains copyrighted for three years after its release well, unless the "
+#~ "company is in real bad trouble they should have a new version before "
+#~ "those three years are up and there will be a lot of people who will want "
+#~ "to use the newer version, so if older versions are all becoming free "
+#~ "software automatically, the company would still have a business with the "
+#~ "newer version. Now this is a compromise as I see it, because it is a "
+#~ "system in which not all software is free, but it might be an acceptable "
+#~ "compromise, after all, if we had to wait three years in some cases for "
+#~ "programs to become free… well, that's no disaster. To be using "
+#~ "three years old software is not a disaster."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Au départ, elle a appellé les "
+#~ "sociétés d'enregistrement entre guillemets « "
+#~ "pirates » pour la façon dont ils traitaient les "
+#~ "musiciens. Dans tous les cas, nous pouvons raccourcir le copyright plus "
+#~ "ou moins. Nous pourrions essayer diverses longueurs, nous pourrions voir, "
+#~ "nous pourrions découvrir empiriquement quelle durée de "
+#~ "copyright est nécessaire pour maintenir la publication vigoureuse. "
+#~ "Je dirais que, puisque les livres sont quasi hors de circuit au bout de "
+#~ "dix ans, clairement dix ans devraient être assez longs. Mais ce ne "
+#~ "doit pas être pareil pour tous les genres de travail. Par exemple, "
+#~ "peut-être que certains aspects du copyright sur les films "
+#~ "pourraient durer plus longtemps, comme les droits de vendre tout "
+#~ "l'attirail d'images et de personnages afférents. Vous savez, c'est "
+#~ "tellement grossièrement commercial qu'il importe peu que ce cela "
+#~ "soit limité à une seule société souvent. Peut-"
+#~ "être que le copyright sur les films eux-mêmes est lé"
+#~ "gitimé pour que ça dure vingt ans. En attendant pour le "
+#~ "logiciel, je pense qu'un copyright de trois ans serait suffisant. Vous "
+#~ "voyez, si chaque version de programme conserve un copyright de trois ans "
+#~ "après sa sortie, à moins que la compagnie ne soit en "
+#~ "très mauvaise posture, ils devraient avoir une nouvelle version "
+#~ "avant que les trois ans soient achevés. Et il y aura beaucoup de "
+#~ "gens désireux de l'utiliser. Aussi si les anciennes versions "
+#~ "devenaient automatiquement libres, ils continueraient quand même de "
+#~ "faire des affaires sur la nouvelle. Maintenant c'est un compromis comme "
+#~ "je les vois , parce que c'est un système où tous les "
+#~ "logiciels ne sont pas libres. Mais ce serait un compromis acceptable "
+#~ "après tout, si nous devions attendre trois ans en gé"
+#~ "néral pour que les logiciels deviennent libres… bien, il "
+#~ "n'y a pas de désastre. Que l'on utilise des logiciels vieux de "
+#~ "trois ans n'est pas un désastre."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM3</strong>: Don't you think this is a system that would favour "
+#~ "feature creep?"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA3</strong> : Ne pensez-vous pas que c'est un systè"
+#~ "me qui encouragerait la dégradation des fonctions ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: <em>[airily]</em> Ah that's OK. That's a minor side "
+#~ "issue, compared with these issues of freedom encouraging, every system "
+#~ "encourages some artificial distortions in what people, and our present "
+#~ "system certainly encourages various kinds of artificial distortions in "
+#~ "activity that is covered by copyright so if a changed system also "
+#~ "encourages a few of these secondary distortions it's not a big deal I "
+#~ "would say."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : <em>[désinvolte]</em> Ah, c'est exact. "
+#~ "C'est un effet secondaire mineur, comparé aux questions de "
+#~ "liberté qu'il soulève. Chaque système entraîne "
+#~ "quelques déviations artificielles chez certaines personnes, et "
+#~ "notre système actuel encourage certainement diverses sortes de "
+#~ "déviations artificielles dans l'activité couverte par le "
+#~ "copyright. Ainsi, si un système parce qu'il change, encourage en "
+#~ "même temps quelques déformations secondaires, ce n'est pas "
+#~ "une grosse affaire je dirais."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM4</strong>: The problem with this change in the copyright laws "
+#~ "for three would be that you wouldn't get the sources."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA4</strong> : Le problème avec ce changement des "
+#~ "lois sur le copyright pour trois ans, c'est que vous n'obtiendriez pas "
+#~ "les sources."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Right. There would have also to be a condition, a "
+#~ "law that to sell copies of the software to the public the source code "
+#~ "must be deposited somewhere so that three years later it can be released. "
+#~ "So it could be deposited say, with the library of congress in the US, and "
+#~ "I think other countries have similar institutions where copies of "
+#~ "published books get placed, and they could also received the source code "
+#~ "and after three years, publish it. And of course, if the source code "
+#~ "didn't correspond to the executable that would be fraud, and in fact if "
+#~ "it really corresponds then they ought to be able to check that very "
+#~ "easily when the work is published initially so you're publishing the "
+#~ "source code and somebody there says alright “dot slash configure "
+#~ "dot slash make” and sees if produces the same executables and uh."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Exact. Il y aurait là aussi une "
+#~ "condition. Une loi qui dirait que pour pouvoir vendre des copies de "
+#~ "logiciel au public, le code source doit être déposé "
+#~ "quelque part de sorte que trois ans plus tard il puisse être "
+#~ "libéré. Ainsi il pourrait être déposé "
+#~ "à la bibliothèque du Congrès aux USA; et je pense "
+#~ "que d'autres pays ont des établissements semblables où les "
+#~ "copies des livres publiés prennent place. Et ils pourraient "
+#~ "également accueillir le code source et après trois ans, le "
+#~ "publier. Et naturellement, si le code source ne correspondait pas "
+#~ "à l'exécutable il y aurait fraude. En fait si cela "
+#~ "correspond vraiment, on devrait pouvoir très facilement le "
+#~ "vérifier quand le travail est publié au départ. "
+#~ "Ainsi vous éditez le code source et quelqu'un dit que c'est bon "
+#~ "« dot slash configure dot slash make » et voit si "
+#~ "cela produit les mêmes executables et hue."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "So you're right, just eliminating copyright would not make software free."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Aussi vous avez raison, éliminer le copyright ne rendrait pas le "
+#~ "logiciel « free »."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>AM5</strong>: Um libre"
+#~ msgstr "<strong>MA5</strong> : Heu…libre"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Right. That's the only sense I use the term. It "
+#~ "wouldn't do that because the source code might not be available or they "
+#~ "might try to use contracts to restrict the users instead. So making "
+#~ "software free is not as simple as ending copyright on software: it's a "
+#~ "more complex situation than that. In fact, if copyright were simply "
+#~ "abolished from software then we would no longer be able to use copyleft "
+#~ "to protect the free status of a program but meanwhile the software "
+#~ "privateers could use other methods—contracts or withholding the "
+#~ "source to make software proprietary. So what would mean is, if we release "
+#~ "a free program some greedy bastard could make a modified version and "
+#~ "publish just the binaries and make people sign non-disclosure agreements "
+#~ "for them. We would no longer have a way to stop them. So if we wanted to "
+#~ "change the law that all software that was published had to be free we "
+#~ "would have to do it in some more complex way, not just by turning "
+#~ "copyright for software."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Exact. C'est dans ce seul sens que j'emploie "
+#~ "le terme. Ça ne le ferait pas, parce que le code source ne "
+#~ "pourrait pas être disponible, ou à la place ils pourraient "
+#~ "tenter d'user de contrats pour restreindre les utilisateurs. Ainsi, "
+#~ "rendre le logiciel libre n'est pas aussi simple que de mettre fin au "
+#~ "copyright sur le logiciel : c'est une situation plus complexe que "
+#~ "ça. En fait, si le copyright sur le logiciel était "
+#~ "simplement supprimé, nous ne pourrions plus utiliser le copyleft "
+#~ "pour protéger le statut libre d'un programme. En même temps, "
+#~ "les adeptes du logiciel propriétaire pourraient utiliser d'autres "
+#~ "méthodes — des contrats ou des dissimulations sur la source "
+#~ "pour rendre le logiciel propriétaire. Ainsi ça pourrait "
+#~ "signifier qu'à la sortie d'un programme libre quelque bâtard "
+#~ "avide pourrait en faire une version modifiée et n'en publier que "
+#~ "les binaires, et inciter des personnes à signer des accords de non-"
+#~ "divulgation sur eux. Nous pourrions ne plus avoir les moyens de les "
+#~ "arrêter. Aussi, si nous voulions changer la loi pour que tout "
+#~ "logiciel publié devienne libre, nous devrions le faire de "
+#~ "façon encore plus complexe. Pas simplement en changeant le "
+#~ "copyright sur le logiciel."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "So, overall I would recommend we look at the various kinds of works and "
+#~ "the various different kinds of uses and then look for a new place to draw "
+#~ "the line: one that gives the public the most important freedoms for "
+#~ "making use of each new kind of work while when possible retaining some "
+#~ "kind of fairly painless kind of copyright for general public that is "
+#~ "still of benefit to authors. In this way we can adapt the copyright "
+#~ "system to the circumstances where we find it we find ourselves and have a "
+#~ "system that doesn't require putting people in prison for years because "
+#~ "they shared with their friends, but still does in various ways encourage "
+#~ "people to write more. We can also I believe look for other ways of "
+#~ "encouraging writing other ways of facilitating authors making money. For "
+#~ "example, suppose that verbatim redistribution of a work is permitted and "
+#~ "suppose that the work comes with something, so that when you are playing "
+#~ "with it or reading it, there is a box on the side that says “click "
+#~ "here to send one dollar to the authors or the musicians or "
+#~ "whatever” I think that in the wealthier parts of the world a lot of "
+#~ "people will send it because people often really love the authors and "
+#~ "musicians that made the things that they like to read and listen to. And "
+#~ "the interesting thing is that the royalty that they get now is such a "
+#~ "small fraction that if you pay twenty dollars for something they're "
+#~ "probably not getting more than one anyway."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Ainsi, globalement je recommande à ce que nous examinions les "
+#~ "diverses sortes de travaux et les diverses sortes de variété"
+#~ "s d'utilisation, et chercher là un nouvel endroit pour tracer les "
+#~ "limites : celles qui donneraient au public les libertés les "
+#~ "plus importantes pour trouver une utilisation à chaque nouveau "
+#~ "genre de travail, en maintenant si possible pendant ce temps une sorte de "
+#~ "copyright d'un genre indolore pour le grand public qui soit toujours un "
+#~ "avantage pour les auteurs. De cette façon, nous pouvons adapter le "
+#~ "système de copyright aux circonstances dans lesquelles nous le "
+#~ "trouvons en nous trouvant nous-même. Et avoir un système qui "
+#~ "n'exige pas de mettre des gens en prison pour des années parce "
+#~ "qu'ils auront partagé avec leurs amis, mais encourageant toujours "
+#~ "de diverses manières les auteurs à écrire plus. Nous "
+#~ "pouvons également je crois, chercher d'autres façons "
+#~ "d'encourager l'écriture, d'autres façons d'encourager les "
+#~ "auteurs à gagner de l'argent. Par exemple, supposez que la "
+#~ "reproduction intégrale d'un travail soit autorisée et "
+#~ "supposez que ce travail va avec quelquechose, du genre lorsque vous "
+#~ "êtes en train de jouer avec, ou de le lire, il y a une boîte "
+#~ "sur le côté qui dit: « cliquez ici pour envoyer 1 "
+#~ "dollar à l'auteur ou au musicien ou tout ce que vous voudrez "
+#~ "». Je pense que dans les parties les plus riches du monde beaucoup "
+#~ "de gens l'enverraient parce que souvent les gens adorent les auteurs ou "
+#~ "les musiciens qui ont créé ce qu'ils ont aimé lire "
+#~ "ou écouter. Et la chose intéressante est que la redevance "
+#~ "qu'ils auront obtenue est maintenant une si petite fraction, que si vous "
+#~ "payez vingt dollars ils n'en obtiendront pas plus d'un de toute faç"
+#~ "on."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "So this will be a far more efficient system. And the interesting thing "
+#~ "will be that when people redistribute these copies they will be helping "
+#~ "the author. Essentially advertising them, spreading around these reasons "
+#~ "to send them a dollar. Now right now the biggest reason why more people "
+#~ "don't just send some money to the authors is that it's a pain in the neck "
+#~ "to do it. What are you going to do? Write a cheque? Then who are you "
+#~ "going to mail the cheque to? You'd have to dig up their address, which "
+#~ "might not be easy. But with a convenient internet payment system which "
+#~ "makes it efficient to pay someone one dollar, then we could put this into "
+#~ "all the copies, and then I think you'd find the mechanism starting to "
+#~ "work well. It may take five of ten years for the ideas to spread around, "
+#~ "because it's a cultural thing, you know, at first people might find it a "
+#~ "little surprising but once it gets normal people would become accustomed "
+#~ "to sending the money, and it wouldn't be a lot of money compared to what "
+#~ "it costs to buy books today."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Ce sera un système bien plus efficace ainsi. Et ce qui sera "
+#~ "intéressant c'est que quand les gens redistribueront ces copies, "
+#~ "ils aident l'auteur. En faisant essentiellement de la publicité "
+#~ "pour eux, en diffusant autour d'eux des raisons de leur envoyer un "
+#~ "dollar. Maintenant, en ce moment, la plus grande raison pour laquelle pas "
+#~ "plus de personne n'envoie de l'argent directement aux auteurs, c'est que "
+#~ "c'est un emmerdement de le faire. Qu'allez-vous faire ? Envoyer un "
+#~ "chèque ? Alors à qui allez-vous expédier le "
+#~ "chèque ? Vous auriez à dénicher leur adresse, "
+#~ "ce qui pourrait ne pas être facile. Mais avec un système "
+#~ "commode de paiement sur Internet qui le rend efficace pour payer un "
+#~ "dollar à quelqu'un, que nous pourrions mettre dans toutes les "
+#~ "copies, alors je pense que vous auriez là un mécanisme qui "
+#~ "commence à bien marcher. Il peut prendre cinq à dix ans "
+#~ "pour que l'idée soit propagée partout, parceque c'est une "
+#~ "chose culturelle, vous savez. Au départ, les gens pourraient la "
+#~ "trouver surprenante mais un jour ça devient naturel. Les gens "
+#~ "s'habitueraient à envoyer de l'argent, et ça ne repré"
+#~ "senterait pas beaucoup d'argent comparé à ce que cela "
+#~ "coûte d'acheter des livres aujourd'hui."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[drinks]</em>"
+#~ msgstr "<em>[il boit]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "So I think that in this way, for the works of expression, and maybe "
+#~ "aesthetic works, maybe this could a successful method. But it won't work "
+#~ "for the functional works, and the reason for that is that as one person "
+#~ "after another makes a modified version and publishes it, who should the "
+#~ "boxes point to, and how much money should they send, and you know, it's "
+#~ "easy to do this when the work was published just once, by a certain "
+#~ "author, or certain group of authors, and they can just agree together "
+#~ "what they're going to do and click on the box, if no-one is publishing "
+#~ "modified versions then every copy will contain the same box with the same "
+#~ "URL directing money to the same people but when you have different "
+#~ "version which have been worked on by different people there's no simple "
+#~ "automatic way of working out who ought to get what fraction of what users "
+#~ "donate for this version or that version. It's philosophically hard to "
+#~ "decide how important each contribution is, and all the obvious ways of "
+#~ "trying to measure it are <em>[emphasis]</em> obviously <em>[/emphasis]</"
+#~ "em> wrong in some cases, they're obviously closing their eyes to some "
+#~ "important part of the facts so I think that this kind of solution is "
+#~ "probably not feasible when everybody is free to publish modified "
+#~ "versions. But for those kinds of works where it is not crucial to have "
+#~ "the freedom to publish modified versions then this solution can be "
+#~ "applied very simply once we have the convenient internet payment system "
+#~ "to base it on."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Aussi je pense que de cette façon, pour les travaux d'expression, "
+#~ "et peut-être les travaux esthétiques, ce pourrait être "
+#~ "une méthode réussie. Mais cela ne fonctionnera pas pour les "
+#~ "travaux fonctionnels. Et la raison pour ça, c'est que, si une "
+#~ "personne après une autre fait une version modifiée et la "
+#~ "publie, sur qui les boîtes se dirigeraient-elles? Et combien "
+#~ "d'argent devraient-elle envoyer ? Et vous savez, il est facile de "
+#~ "faire ça quand le travail a été publié "
+#~ "simplement par le passé, par un certain auteur, ou un certain "
+#~ "groupe d'auteurs, et ils peuvent juste convenir ensemble de ce qu'ils "
+#~ "vont faire et cliquer sur la boîte. Si personne ne publie de "
+#~ "versions modifiées alors chaque copie contiendra la même "
+#~ "boîte avec le même URL dirigeant l'argent vers les mê"
+#~ "mes personnes. Mais quand vous avezdifférentes versions qui ont "
+#~ "été travaillées par différentes personnes, il "
+#~ "n'y a pas de simple façon automatique de calculer qui, doit "
+#~ "obtenir quelle fraction, de ce que quel utilisateur donne, pour cette "
+#~ "version ou celle-là. Il est philosophiquement difficile de "
+#~ "décider de l'importance de chaque contribution, et de toutes les "
+#~ "manières évidentes d'essayer de la mesurer certaines sont "
+#~ "<em>[emphase ]</em> évidemment <em>[/emphase ]</em> mauvaises dans "
+#~ "certains cas, en fermant évidemment les yeux à une partie "
+#~ "importante des faits, aussi je pense que ce genre de solution n'est "
+#~ "probablement pas faisable quand tout le monde est libre de publier des "
+#~ "versions modifiées. Mais pour le genre de travaux où il "
+#~ "n'est pas crucial d'avoir la liberté de publier des versions "
+#~ "modifiées, alors cette solution peut être appliqué "
+#~ "très simplement, une fois que nous avons le système "
+#~ "pratique de paiement sur Internet pour la baser dessus."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "With regard to the aesthetic works. If there is a system where those who "
+#~ "commercially redistribute or maybe even those who are publishing a "
+#~ "modified version might have to negotiate the sharing of the payments with "
+#~ "the original developers and then this kind of scheme could be extended to "
+#~ "those works too even if modified versions are permitted there could be "
+#~ "some standard formula which could be in some cases renegotiated, so I "
+#~ "think in some cases probably possible even with a system of permitting in "
+#~ "some way publishing modified versions of the aesthetic works it may be "
+#~ "possible still to have this kind of voluntary payment system."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "En ce qui concerne les travaux esthétiques. S'il y a un "
+#~ "système où ceux qui redistribuent commercialement - ou peut-"
+#~ "être même ceux qui publient une version modifiée - "
+#~ "peuvent avoir à négocier le partage des paiements avec le "
+#~ "producteur de la version originale, alors ce genre d'arrangement pourrait "
+#~ "être prolongé aussi à ces travaux; même si des "
+#~ "versions modifiées sont autorisées, il pourrait y avoir une "
+#~ "certaine formule standard qui pourrait être renégocié"
+#~ "e dans certains cas. Ainsi je pense que dans certains cas, probablement "
+#~ "possibles même avec un système qui permet de publier des "
+#~ "versions modifiées des travaux esthétiques, il serait "
+#~ "possible d'avoir ce genre de système volontaire de paiement."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Now I believe there a people who are trying to set up such voluntary "
+#~ "payment systems. I heard of something called the street performer's "
+#~ "protocol. I don't know the details of it. And I believe there is "
+#~ "something called GreenWitch.com <em>[transcriber's note: URL uncertain]</"
+#~ "em> I believe the people there are trying to set up something more or "
+#~ "less like this. I think that what they are hoping to do is collect a "
+#~ "bunch of payments that you make to various different people, and "
+#~ "eventually charge your credit card once it gets to be big enough so that "
+#~ "it's efficient. Whether those kind of systems work smoothly enough in "
+#~ "practice that they'll get going is not clear, and whether they will "
+#~ "become adopted widely enough for them to become a normal cultural "
+#~ "practice is not clear. It may be that in order for these voluntary "
+#~ "payments to truly catch on we need to have some kind of… you need "
+#~ "to see the idea everywhere in order to… “Yeah, I outta "
+#~ "pay“ once in a while. We'll see."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Maintenant je crois qu'il y a des gens qui essayent d'installer de genre "
+#~ "de systèmes volontaires de paiement. J'ai entendu parler de "
+#~ "quelque chose appelé « le protocole de l'artiste de "
+#~ "rue ». Je n'en connais pas les détails. Et je crois "
+#~ "qu'il y a quelque chose appelé GreenWitch.com <em>[la note du "
+#~ "transcripteur : URL incertaine]</em>. Je crois que ces gens essayent "
+#~ "d'installer quelque chose de plus ou moins comme ça. Je pense que "
+#~ "ce qu'il espèrent faire, c'est de rassembler un bouquet de "
+#~ "paiements que vous effectuez à diverses personnes, et charger "
+#~ "éventuellement par la suite votre carte de crédit une fois "
+#~ "qu'il est assez important pour être efficace. Si ce genre de "
+#~ "système fonctionne sans heurt dans la pratique, ce qu'ils vont "
+#~ "devenir n'est pas clair; et s'ils sont adoptés assez largement, "
+#~ "à ce qu'ils deviennent une pratique culturelle normale n'est pas "
+#~ "clair. Il est possible que pour que ces paiements volontaires se "
+#~ "propagent vraiment, nous ayons besoin d'un certain genre de… vous "
+#~ "avez besoin de voir l'idée partout pour…« ouais, "
+#~ "j'ai pas à payer ! » de temps à autre. On "
+#~ "verra."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "There is evidence ideas like this are not unreasonable. If you look at "
+#~ "for example public radio in the US, which is mostly supported by "
+#~ "donations from listeners, you have I believe, millions of people "
+#~ "donating, I'm not sure how many exactly but there are many public radio "
+#~ "stations which are supported by their listeners and they seem to be "
+#~ "finding it easier to get donations as time goes on. Ten years ago they "
+#~ "would have maybe six weeks of the year when they were spending most of "
+#~ "their time asking people “Please send some money, don't you think "
+#~ "we're important enough” and so on 24 hours a day, and now a lot of "
+#~ "them have found that they can raise the contributions by sending people "
+#~ "mail who sent them donations in the past, and they don't have to spend "
+#~ "their airtime drumming up the donations."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Il est évident que des idées comme celles-là ne sont "
+#~ "pas déraisonnables. Si vous regardez par exemple la radio publique "
+#~ "aux USA, qui est la plupart du temps soutenue par les dons de ses "
+#~ "auditeurs. Vous avez, je crois, des millions de personnes qui donnent. Je "
+#~ "ne sais pas combien exactement mais il y a beaucoup de stations de radio "
+#~ "publiques qui sont soutenues par leurs auditeurs. Et il semble qu'elles "
+#~ "trouvent plus facile d'obtenir des dons au fil des ans. Il y a dix ans "
+#~ "elles auraient eu peut-être six semaines par an à passer la "
+#~ "majeure partie du temps à demander aux gens « d'envoyer "
+#~ "svp un peu d'argent, vous ne pensez pas que nous sommes assez importants "
+#~ "pour vous » et ainsi de suite 24 heures sur 24. Et maintenant "
+#~ "beaucoup d'entre elles ont constaté qu'elles peuvent augmenter les "
+#~ "contributions en envoyant des mails aux gens qui leur ont envoyé "
+#~ "des dons par le passé. Et elles n'ont pas à dépenser "
+#~ "leur temps d'antenne à racoler pour les dons."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Fundamentally, the stated purpose of copyright: to encourage righting is "
+#~ "a worthwhile purpose, but we have to look at ways of ways to achieve it "
+#~ "that are not so harsh, and not so constricting of the use of the works "
+#~ "whose developments we have encouraged and I believe that digital "
+#~ "technology is providing us with solutions to the problem as well as "
+#~ "creating a context where we need to solve the problem. So that's the end "
+#~ "of this talk, and are there questions?"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Fondamentalement, le but déclaré du copyright : "
+#~ "encourager le redressement est un but valable, mais nous devons examiner "
+#~ "les façons d'y parvenir qui ne sont pas si dures, et sans trop "
+#~ "restreindre l'utilisation des travaux dont nous avons encouragé "
+#~ "les développements. Et je crois que la technologie numé"
+#~ "rique nous fournit des solutions au problème en plus de cré"
+#~ "er le contexte où nous devons résoudre le problème. "
+#~ "Aussi c'est la fin de cet entretien; et il a des questions ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <h3>
+#~ msgid "Questions and discussion"
+#~ msgstr "Questions et discussion"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "First of all, what time is the next talk? What time is it now?"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Tout d'abord, quand est le prochain entretien ? Quelle heure est-il "
+#~ "maintenant ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>Me</strong>: The time is quarter past three."
+#~ msgstr "<strong>Moi</strong> : Il est trois heures et quart."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Oh really? So I'm late already? Well I hope Melanie "
+#~ "will permit me to accept a few questions."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Oh vraiment ? Donc je suis dé"
+#~ "jà en retard ? Bon, j'espère que Mélanie me "
+#~ "permettra d'accepter quelques questions."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM6</strong> (Audience member 6): Who will decide in which of "
+#~ "your three categories will a work fit?"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA6</strong> : Qui décidera dans lesquelles de vos "
+#~ "trois catégories un travail rentrera ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: I don't know. I'm sure there are various ways of "
+#~ "deciding. You can probably tell a novel when you see one. I suspect "
+#~ "judges can tell a novel when they see one too."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Je ne sais pas. Je suis sûr qu'il y a "
+#~ "diverses manières de décider. Vous pouvez probablement "
+#~ "reconnaître un roman quand vous en voyez un. Je subodore que les "
+#~ "juges peuvent aussi reconnaître un roman quand ils en voient un."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM7</strong>: Any comment on encryption? And the interaction of "
+#~ "encryption devices with copyrighted materials?"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA7</strong> : Des commentaires sur le chiffrement ? Et "
+#~ "sur l'interaction des dispositifs de chiffrement avec les contenus sous "
+#~ "copyright ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Well, encryption is being used as a means of "
+#~ "controlling the public. The publishers are trying to impose various "
+#~ "encryption systems on the public so that they can block the public from "
+#~ "copying. Now they call these things technological methods, but really "
+#~ "they all rest on laws prohibiting people from by-passing them, and "
+#~ "without those laws none of these methods would accomplish its purpose, so "
+#~ "they are all based on direct government intervention to stop people from "
+#~ "copying and I object to them very strongly, and I will not accept those "
+#~ "media. If as a practical matter the means to copy something are not "
+#~ "available to me I won't buy it, and I hope you won't buy it either."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Bon, le chiffrement est employé en "
+#~ "tant que moyen pour contrôler le public. Les éditeurs "
+#~ "essayent d'imposer divers systèmes de chiffrement au public afin "
+#~ "de l'empêcher de copier. Maintenant ils appellent ces choses des "
+#~ "méthodes technologiques, mais réellement elles s'appuient "
+#~ "toutes sur des lois interdisant aux gens de les contourner. Et sans ces "
+#~ "lois aucune de ces méthodes n'accomplirait son but. Aussi elles "
+#~ "sont toutes sont basées sur l'interposition directe du "
+#~ "gouvernement pour que les gens arrêtent de copier. Et je m'oppose "
+#~ "à elles très fortement, et je n'accepterai pas ces mé"
+#~ "dias. Si pour une question pratique les moyens de copier quelque chose ne "
+#~ "sont pas à ma disposition je ne l'achèterai pas. Et "
+#~ "j'espère que vous ne l'achèterez pas non plus."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM8</strong>: In France we have a law that says that even if the "
+#~ "media is protected you have the right to copy again for backup purpose"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA8</strong> : En France nous avons une loi qui dit que "
+#~ "même si le support est protégé vous avez le droit de "
+#~ "le copier à nouveau pour le sauvegarder."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Yes it used to be that way in the US as well until "
+#~ "2 years ago."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Oui, c'était aussi comme ça aux "
+#~ "USA jusqu'à il y a deux ans."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM8</strong>: Very often you sign an agreement that is illegal in "
+#~ "France… the contract you are supposed to sign with a mouse…"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA8</strong> : Très souvent vous signez un accord qui "
+#~ "est illégal en France… le contrat que vous êtes "
+#~ "censé signer avec une souris…"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>RMS</strong>: Well, maybe they're not."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Bien, peut-être qu'ils ne le sont pas."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>AM8</strong>: How can we get it challenged?"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA8</strong> : Comment pouvons-nous le contester ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: <em>[rhetorically]</em> Well are you going to "
+#~ "challenge them? It costs money, it takes trouble, and not only that, how "
+#~ "would you do it? Well, you could either try to go to a court and say, "
+#~ "“They have no right to ask people to sign this contract because it "
+#~ "is an invalid contract” but that might be difficult if the "
+#~ "distributor is in the US. French law about what is a valid contract "
+#~ "couldn't be used to stop them in the US. On the other hand you could "
+#~ "also say “I signed this contract but it's not valid in France so I "
+#~ "am publicly disobeying, and I challenge them to sue me.” Now that "
+#~ "you might consider doing, and if you're right and the laws are not valid "
+#~ "in France then the case would get thrown out. I don't know. Maybe that is "
+#~ "a good idea to do, I don't know whether, what its effects politically "
+#~ "would be. I know that there was just a couple of years ago a law was "
+#~ "passed in Europe to prohibit some kind of private copying of music, and "
+#~ "the record companies trotted out some famous very popular musicians to "
+#~ "push for this law and they got it, so it's clear that they have a lot of "
+#~ "influence here too, and it's possible that they will get more, just pass "
+#~ "another law to change this. We have to think about the political "
+#~ "strategy for building the constituency to resist such changes and the "
+#~ "actions we take should be designed to accomplish that. Now, I'm no expert "
+#~ "on how to accomplish that in Europe but that's what people should think "
+#~ "about."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : <em>[rhéthoriquement]</em> Bien, vous allez "
+#~ "les contester ? Ca coûte de l'argent, il faut se donner du "
+#~ "mal, et pas seulement ça. Comment le feriez-vous ? Bon, vous "
+#~ "pourriez toujours aller au tribunal et dire, « ils n'ont aucun "
+#~ "droit de demander à des personnes de signer ce contrat parce que "
+#~ "c'est un contrat invalide » mais ça pourrait être "
+#~ "difficile si le distributeur est aux USA. La loi française au "
+#~ "sujet de ce qui est un contrat valide ne pourrait pas être utilisée
"
+#~ "pour les arrêter aux USA. D'autre part vous pourriez é"
+#~ "galement dire que « j'ai signéce contrat mais il n'est "
+#~ "pas valide en France, aussi je désobéis publiquement et je "
+#~ "les défie de me poursuivre ». Maintenant si c'est ce "
+#~ "que vous envisagez de faire, si vous avez raison et si les lois ne sont "
+#~ "pas valides en France alors le cas serait rejeté. Je ne sais pas. "
+#~ "Peut-être que c'est une bonne idée. Je ne sais pas quels en "
+#~ "seraient les effets politiques. Je sais qu'il y a juste deux ans une loi "
+#~ "a été votée en Europe pour interdire un certain "
+#~ "genre de copie privée pour la musique, et les compagnies "
+#~ "d'enregistrement ont rabâché à quelques musiciens "
+#~ "célèbres très populaires de faire pression sur cette "
+#~ "loi, et ils l'ont obtenue. Aussi, il est clair qu'ils ont beaucoup "
+#~ "d'influence ici aussi, et il est possible qu'ils en obtiendront plus, "
+#~ "voter justement une autre loi pour changer ça. Nous devons penser "
+#~ "à une stratégie politique pour construire un collège "
+#~ "électoral qui puisse résister à de tels changements. "
+#~ "Et les mesures que nous prenons devraient être conçues pour "
+#~ "accomplir ça. Maintenant je ne suis pas un expert sur la faç"
+#~ "on de le réaliser en Europe, mais c'est à ça que les "
+#~ "gens devraient penser."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM6</strong>: What about protection of private correspondence?"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA6</strong> : Que dites-vous de la protection de la "
+#~ "correspondance privée ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Well, if you're not <em>[emphasis]</em> publishing "
+#~ "<em>[/emphasis]</em> it that's a completely different issue."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Bien, si vous n'êtes pas <em>[emphase]</"
+#~ "em> publié <em>[/emphase]</em>, c'est une question complè"
+#~ "tement différente."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM6</strong>: No, but if I send an email to somebody, that's "
+#~ "automatically under my copyright."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA6</strong> : Non, mais si j'envoie un email à "
+#~ "quelqu'un, c'est automatiquement sous mon copyright."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: <em>[forcefully]</em> That's entirely irrelevant "
+#~ "actually."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : <em>[énergiquement]</em> C'est "
+#~ "entièrement non pertinent en réalité."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM6</strong>: No, I don't accept that. If they're going to "
+#~ "publish it in a newspaper. At the moment my redress is my copyright."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA6</strong> : Non, je ne l'accepte pas. S'ils vont "
+#~ "l'éditer dans un journal, à ce moment là mon recours "
+#~ "est mon copyright."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Well, you can't make him keep secret the contents "
+#~ "and I'm not sure actually. I mean to me, I think there's some injustice "
+#~ "in that. If you for example, send a letter to somebody threatening to sue "
+#~ "him and then you tell him you can't tell anybody I did this because my "
+#~ "threat is copyrighted, that's pretty obnoxious, and I'm not sure that it "
+#~ "would even be upheld."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Bien, vous ne pouvez pas lui faire tenir "
+#~ "secret les contenus et je n'en suis pas sûr réellement. Je "
+#~ "veux dire, je pense qu'il y a de l'injustice à cela. Si par "
+#~ "exemple vous envoyez une lettre à quelqu'un menaçant de le "
+#~ "poursuivre en justice, et alors vous lui dites que vous ne pouvez dire "
+#~ "à personne que c'est moi qui l'ai fait parce que ma menace est "
+#~ "garantie par les droits d'auteur, ça serait assez dé"
+#~ "sagréable. Et je ne suis pas sûr que cela serait même "
+#~ "confirmé."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM6</strong>: Well, there are circumstances where I want to "
+#~ "correspond with someone and keep my (and their) reply, entirely private."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA6</strong> : Bon, il y a des circonstances où je "
+#~ "veux correspondre avec quelqu'un et garder ma (et leur) réponse, "
+#~ "entièrement privée."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Well if you and they agree to keep it private, then "
+#~ "that's a different matter entirely. I'm sorry the two issues can not be "
+#~ "linked, and I don't have time to consider that issue today. There's "
+#~ "another talk scheduled to start soon. But I think it is a total mistake "
+#~ "for copyright to apply to such situations. The ethics of those situations "
+#~ "are completely different from the ethics of published works and so they "
+#~ "should be treated in an appropriate way, which is completely different."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Bien, si vous et eux acceptez de la maintenir "
+#~ "privé, alors c'est une question entièrement diffé"
+#~ "rente. Je suis désolé que les deux questions ne puissent "
+#~ "pas être liées, et je n'ai pas le temps de considérer "
+#~ "cette question aujourd'hui. Il y a un autre entretien programmé "
+#~ "pour commencer bientôt. Mais je pense que c'est une erreur totale "
+#~ "que le copyright s'applique à de telles situations. L'é"
+#~ "thique de ces situations est complètement différente de "
+#~ "l'éthique des travaux publiés. Et elles devraient ê"
+#~ "tre traitées d'une manière appropriée, qui est "
+#~ "complètement différente."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM6</strong>: That's fair enough, but at the moment the only "
+#~ "redress one has is copyright…"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA6</strong> : C'est assez loyal, mais pour l'instant le "
+#~ "seul recours est le copyright…"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: <em>[interrupts]</em> No you're wrong. If people "
+#~ "have agreed to keep something private then you have other redress. In "
+#~ "Europe there are privacy laws, and the other thing is, you don't have a "
+#~ "right to force someone to keep secrets for you. At most, you could force "
+#~ "him to paraphrase it, because he has a right to tell people what you did."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : <em>[il interrompt]</em> Non, vous avez tort. "
+#~ "Si les gens sont d'acccord pour garder quelque chose secret alors vous "
+#~ "avez un autre recours. En Europe il y a des lois sur la vie privé"
+#~ "e. Et l'autre chose, est que vous ne pouvez pas avoir le droit de forcer "
+#~ "quelqu'un à garder des secrets pour vous. Tout au plus, vous "
+#~ "pourriez le forcer à paraphraser, parce qu'il a le droit de dire "
+#~ "aux gens ce que vous faites."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM6</strong>: Yes, but I assuming that the two people at either "
+#~ "end are both in reasonable agreement."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA6</strong> : Oui, mais en supposant que les deux personnes "
+#~ "à chaque extrémité sont toutes deux d'accord de "
+#~ "façon raisonnable."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Well then, don't say that copyright is your only "
+#~ "recourse. If he's in agreement he isn't going to give it to a newspaper "
+#~ "is he?"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Bien et alors, ne dîtes pas que le "
+#~ "copyright est votre seul recours. S'il est d'accord il ne va pas le "
+#~ "donner à un journal, si ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM6</strong>: No, er, you're sidestepping my question about "
+#~ "interception."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA6</strong> : Non, heu, vous évitez ma question au "
+#~ "sujet de l'interception."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Oh interception. That's a totally different… "
+#~ "<em>[heatedly]</em> no you didn't ask about interception. This is the "
+#~ "first time you mentioned interception…"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Oh, interception. C'est complètement "
+#~ "différent… <em>[âprement]</em> non vous n'avez pas "
+#~ "demandé à propos de l'interception. C'est la premiè"
+#~ "re fois que vous avez mentionné l'interception…"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>AM6</strong>: No it's the second time."
+#~ msgstr "<strong>MA6</strong> : Non c'est la deuxième fois."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>AM9</strong>: <em>[murmurs assent to AM6]</em>"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA9</strong> : <em>[murmure son assentiment à MA6]</"
+#~ "em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: <em>[still heated]</em> Well I didn't hear you "
+#~ "before… it's totally silly… it's like trying to… oh "
+#~ "how can I compare?… it's like trying to kill an elephant with a "
+#~ "waffle iron I mean they have nothing to do with each other."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : <em>[toujours irrité]</em> Je ne vous "
+#~ "avais pas entendu avant… c'est totalement idiot… c'est "
+#~ "comme essayer de… oh à quoi puis-je comparer ?…"
+#~ "c'est comme essayer de tuer un éléphant avec un moule "
+#~ "à gaufres, je veux dire qu'ils n'ont rien à faire l'un avec "
+#~ "l'autre."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[uninterpretable silence falls]</em>"
+#~ msgstr "<em>[un ininterprétable silence tombe]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM10</strong>: Have you thought about changes <em>[inaudible, in "
+#~ "trade secrets?]</em>"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA10</strong> : Vous avez pensé aux changements <em>"
+#~ "[inaudible, des secrets commerciaux ?]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Uh yes: Trade secrets has developed in a very "
+#~ "ominous and menacing direction. It used to be that trade secrecy meant "
+#~ "that you wanted to keep something secret so you didn't tell anybody, and "
+#~ "later on it was something that was done within a business telling just a "
+#~ "few people something and they would agree to keep it secret. But now, "
+#~ "it's turning into something where the public in general is becoming "
+#~ "conscripted into keeping secrets for business even if they have never "
+#~ "agreed in any way to keep these secrets and that's a pressure. So those "
+#~ "who pretend that trade secrecy is just carrying out some natural right of "
+#~ "theirs; that's just not true any more. They're getting explicit "
+#~ "government help in forcing other people to keep their secrets. And we "
+#~ "might want to consider whether non-disclosure agreements should in "
+#~ "general be considered legitimate contracts because of the anti-social "
+#~ "nature of trade secrecy it shouldn't be considered automatic that just "
+#~ "because somebody has promised to keep a secret that that means it's "
+#~ "binding."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : hmm, oui : les secrets commerciaux se "
+#~ "sont développés dans une direction inquiétante et "
+#~ "menaçante. Le secret commercial signifiait que vous vouliez "
+#~ "maintenir secret quelque chose, donc vous ne l'avez dit à "
+#~ "personne, et plus tard, ça s'est fait dans les affaires de dire "
+#~ "juste à quelques personnes quelque chose et ils devaient accepter "
+#~ "de le maintenir secret. Mais maintenant, ça prend une tournure "
+#~ "où le public en général devient enrôlé "
+#~ "dans le fait de garder des secrets d'affaires, même s'ils n'ont "
+#~ "jamais convenu de quelque façon que ce soit de garder ces secrets. "
+#~ "Et c'est une pression. Ainsi à ceux qui feignent de croire que le "
+#~ "secret commercial est juste un transposition sur l'extérieur de "
+#~ "certains de leurs droits, ce n'est justement pas vrai. Ils obtiennent "
+#~ "l'aide explicite du gouvernement en vigueur en forçant les autres "
+#~ "personnes à garder leurs secrets. Et nous pourrions nous demander "
+#~ "si les accords de non-divulgation devraient d'une façon gé"
+#~ "nérale être considérés comme des contrats "
+#~ "légitimes à cause de la nature antisociale du secret "
+#~ "commercial. Il ne devrait pas être considéré comme "
+#~ "automatique, juste parce que quelqu'un a promis de garder un secret, que "
+#~ "c'est obligatoire."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "Maybe in some cases it should be and in some cases it should not be. If "
+#~ "there's a clear public benefit from knowing then maybe that should "
+#~ "invalidate the contract, or maybe it should be valid when it is signed "
+#~ "with customers or maybe between a business and a, maybe when a business "
+#~ "supplies secrets to its suppliers that should be legitimate, but to its "
+#~ "customers, no."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Peut-être que dans certains cas, ça devrait, et dans "
+#~ "d'autres non. S'il y a un avantage public clair de savoir alors peut-"
+#~ "être que ça devrait invalider le contrat. Ou peut-être "
+#~ "devrait-il être valide quand il est signé avec des clients. "
+#~ "Ou peut-être entre une société et un <em>[…]</"
+#~ "em>. Peut-être que ça devrait être légitime "
+#~ "quand une société fournit des secrets à ses "
+#~ "fournisseurs. Mais à ses clients, non."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "There are various possibilities one can think of, but at the very start "
+#~ "anybody who hasn't voluntarily agreed to keep the secrets should not be "
+#~ "bound by trade secrecy. That's the way it was until not long ago. Maybe "
+#~ "it still is that way in Europe, I'm not sure."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Il y a diverses possibilités auxquelles chacun peut penser, mais "
+#~ "tout au début quiconque n'a pas accepté volontairement de "
+#~ "garder les secrets ne devrait pas être lié par le secret "
+#~ "commercial. C'était comme ça il n'y a pas si longtemps "
+#~ "encore. Peut-être que c'est toujours comme ça en Europe, je "
+#~ "ne suis pas sûr."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>AM11</strong>: Is is OK for a company to ask say its…"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA11</strong> : Est-ce qu'une entreprise peut le demander "
+#~ "à ses…"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>RMS</strong>: employees?"
+#~ msgstr "<strong>RMS</strong> : employés ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>AM11</strong>: No no"
+#~ msgstr "<strong>MA11</strong> : Non non"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>RMS</strong>: suppliers?"
+#~ msgstr "<strong>RMS</strong> : fournisseurs ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM11</strong>: yes, suppliers. What if the customer is another "
+#~ "supplier?"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA11</strong> : oui, fournisseurs. Et si le client est un "
+#~ "autre fournisseur ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[gap as minidisk changed]</em>"
+#~ msgstr "<em>[espace pendant que le minidisque est changé]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>RMS</strong>: Let's start by not encouraging it."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Commençons par ne pas l'encourager."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM12</strong>: I have a question regarding your opinion on the "
+#~ "scientific work on journals and textbooks. In my profession at least one "
+#~ "official journal and textbook are available on-line, but they retain "
+#~ "copyright, but there is free access to the resources provided they have "
+#~ "internet access."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA12</strong> : J'ai une question concernant votre avis sur "
+#~ "le travail scientifique des journaux et des manuels. Dans ma profession "
+#~ "au moins un Journal officiel et un manuel sont disponibles en ligne. Ils "
+#~ "maintiennent le copyright, mais il y a un libre accès aux "
+#~ "ressources pourvu qu'on ait l'accès à Internet."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Well, that's good. But there are many journals "
+#~ "where it is not like that. For example, the ACM journals you can't access "
+#~ "unless you are a subscriber: they're blocked. So I think journals should "
+#~ "all start opening up access on the web."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Ok, c'est bon. Mais il y a beaucoup de "
+#~ "journaux où ce n'est pas comme ça. Par exemple, les "
+#~ "journaux d'ACM auxquels vous ne pouvez pas accéder à part "
+#~ "si vous êtes abonné : ils sont bloqués. Aussi je "
+#~ "pense que les journaux devraient tout commencer à en ouvrir "
+#~ "l'accès sur le Web."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM12</strong>: So what impact does that have on the significance "
+#~ "of copyright on the public when you basically don't interfere with "
+#~ "providing free access on the web."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA12</strong> : Aussi, quel impact cela a t-il sur le sens "
+#~ "du copyright sur le public, quand fondamentalement vous n'intervenez pas "
+#~ "en proposant un libre accès sur le net ?"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Well, first of all, I disagree. Mirror sites are "
+#~ "essential, so the journal should only provide open access but they should "
+#~ "also give everyone the freedom to set up mirror sites with verbatim "
+#~ "copies of these papers. If not then there is a danger that they will get "
+#~ "lost. Various kinds of calamities could cause them to be lost, you know, "
+#~ "natural disasters, political disasters, technical disasters, bureaucratic "
+#~ "disasters, fiscal disasters… All sorts of things could cause that "
+#~ "one site to disappear. So really what the scholarly community should "
+#~ "logically be doing is carefully arranging to have a wide network of "
+#~ "mirror sites making sure that every paper is available on every "
+#~ "continent, from places near the ocean to places that are far inland and "
+#~ "you know this is exactly the kind of thing that major libraries will feel "
+#~ "is their mission if only they were not being stopped."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Bien, tout d'abord je suis en dé"
+#~ "saccord. Les sites miroir sont essentiels. Ainsi, le journal devrait non "
+#~ "seulement offrir un accès libre mais devrait également "
+#~ "donner à chacun la liberté d'installer des sites en miroir "
+#~ "avec les copies intégrales de ces articles. Sinon, il y a un "
+#~ "danger qu'ils soient perdus. Divers genres de calamités pourraient "
+#~ "causer leur perte, vous savez, des désastres naturels, dé"
+#~ "sastres politiques, désastres techniques, désastres "
+#~ "bureaucratiques, désastres fiscaux… Toutes sortes de choses "
+#~ "qui pourraient provoquer leur dispararition du site. C'est tellement "
+#~ "vrai, que ce que la communauté savante devrait logiquement faire, "
+#~ "c'est se charger soigneusement d'avoir un large réseau de sites en "
+#~ "miroir en s'assurant que chaque papier est disponible sur chaque "
+#~ "continent; depuis le bord de l'océan jusqu'à l'inté"
+#~ "rieur des terres. Et vous savez que c'est exactement le genre de chose "
+#~ "que les bibliothèques principales sentiront que c'est dans leur "
+#~ "mission de faire, si seulement elles n'étaient pas arrê"
+#~ "tées."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "So what should be done, is that these journals should go one step "
+#~ "further. In addition to saying everybody can access the site they should "
+#~ "be saying, everyone can set up a mirror site. Even if they said, you have "
+#~ "to do the whole publication of this journal, together with our "
+#~ "advertisements, now that would still at least do the job of making the "
+#~ "availability redundant so that it's not in danger, and other institutions "
+#~ "would set up mirror sites, and I predict that you would find ten years "
+#~ "down the road, a very well organised unofficial system of co-ordinating "
+#~ "the mirroring to make sure that nothing was getting left out. At this "
+#~ "point the amount that it costs to set up the mirror site for years of a "
+#~ "journal is so little that it doesn't require any special funding; nobody "
+#~ "has to work very hard: just let librarians do it. Anyway, oh there was "
+#~ "some other thing that this raised and I can't remember what it is. Oh "
+#~ "well, I'll just have to let it go."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "Aussi, ce qui devrait être fait, c'est que ces journaux devraient "
+#~ "faire un pas de plus en avant. En plus de dire « tout le monde "
+#~ "peut accéder au site », ils devraient dire « "
+#~ "chacun peut installer un site miroir ». Même s'ils "
+#~ "disaient « vous devez faire la publication entière de "
+#~ "ce journal, en même temps que nos annonces », né"
+#~ "anmoins ça ne ferait que rendre la disponibilité superflue, "
+#~ "au lieu de la mettre en danger. Et d'autres établissements "
+#~ "installeraient des sites en miroir. Et je prévois que vous "
+#~ "trouveriez dans un peu plus de dix ans, un système officieux "
+#~ "très bien organisé de coordinateurs pour s'assurer que rien "
+#~ "ne serait oublié. En ce moment, ce que cela coûte "
+#~ "d'installer pour des années un site en miroir d'un journal est si "
+#~ "faible qu'il n'exige pas de financement spécial; personne n'a "
+#~ "à travailler très dur : il y a juste à laisser "
+#~ "les bibliothécaires le faire. Quoi qu'il en soit, oh, il y avait "
+#~ "autre chose que ça a soulevé… et je ne me souviens "
+#~ "pas ce que c'était. Oh ,bon, j'ai oublié."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM13</strong>: The financing problem for the aesthetical "
+#~ "works… do you think the dynamics could be… <em>[inaudible]</"
+#~ "em> although I understand the problems of… I mean who's "
+#~ "contributing? and who will be rewarded? Does the spirit of free software "
+#~ "<em>[inaudible]</em>"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA13</strong> : Le problème de financement pour les "
+#~ "travaux esthétiques… pensez-vous que la dynamique pourrait "
+#~ "être… <em>[inaudible]</em> bien que je comprenne les "
+#~ "problèmes de… Je veux dire qui contribue ? Et qui sera "
+#~ "récompensé ? Est-ce que l'esprit du logiciel libre <em>"
+#~ "[inaudible]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: I don't know. It's certainly suggesting the idea to "
+#~ "people. We'll see. I don't the answers, I don't know how we're going to "
+#~ "get there, I'm trying to think about where we should get to. I know know "
+#~ "how we can get there. The publishers are so powerful, and can get "
+#~ "governments to do their bidding. How we're going to build up the kind of "
+#~ "world where the public refuses to tolerate this any more I don't know. I "
+#~ "think the first thing we have to do is to clearly reject the term pirate "
+#~ "and the views that go with it. Every time we hear that we have to speak "
+#~ "out and say this is propaganda, it's not wrong for people to share these "
+#~ "published works with each other, it's sharing with you friend, it's good. "
+#~ "And sharing with your friend is more important than how much money these "
+#~ "companies get. The society shouldn't be shaped for the sake of these "
+#~ "companies. We have to keep on… because you see the idea that "
+#~ "they've spread—that anything that reduces their income is immoral "
+#~ "and therefore people must be restricted in any way it takes to guarantee "
+#~ "for them to be paid for everything… that is the fundamental thing "
+#~ "that we have to start attacking directly. People have mostly tried "
+#~ "tactics of concentrating on secondary issues, you know, to when people, "
+#~ "you know when the publishers demand increased power usually people saying "
+#~ "it will cause some secondary kind of harm and arguing based on that but "
+#~ "you rarely find anybody (except me) saying that the whole point of the "
+#~ "change is wrong, that it's wrong to restrict it in that way, that it's "
+#~ "legitimate for people to want to change copies and that they should be "
+#~ "allowed to. We have to have more of this. We have to start cutting the "
+#~ "root of their dominion not just hacking away at a few leaves."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Je ne sais pas. L'idée vient "
+#~ "certainement à l'esprit des gens. Nous verrons. Je n'ai pas les "
+#~ "réponses. Je ne sais pas comment nous allons les avoir. J'essaye "
+#~ "de penser à peu près où nous pourrions les obtenir. "
+#~ "Je ne sais pas comment nous pourrions y arriver. Les éditeurs sont "
+#~ "si puissants… ils peuvent obtenir des gouvernements qu'ils "
+#~ "exécutent leurs ordres. Comment allons-nous construire ce genre de "
+#~ "monde où le public refuse de tolérer ça plus "
+#~ "longtemps, je ne sais pas. Je pense que la première chose que nous "
+#~ "devons faire est de rejeter clairement le mot pirate et les images qui "
+#~ "vont avec. Tous les jours on nous dit d'oser prendre la parole, et dire "
+#~ "que c'est de la propagande, qu'il n'est pas mauvais pour les gens de "
+#~ "partager ces travaux publiés avec les autres, que c'est partager "
+#~ "avec votre ami, et que c'est bien. Et que partager avec votre ami, c'est "
+#~ "plus important que l'argent que ces compagnies gagnent. Que la "
+#~ "société ne devrait pas être façonnée "
+#~ "sur leurs intérêts. Nous devons continuer… parce que "
+#~ "vous voyez, l'idée qu'elles ont répandu — que tout ce "
+#~ "qui réduit leur revenu est immoral et donc que les gens doivent "
+#~ "être limités quelqu'en soit le moyen pour garantir qu'ils "
+#~ "seront payés pour tout… c'est la chose fondamentale que "
+#~ "nous devons commencer à attaquer directement. Les gens ont la "
+#~ "plupart du temps essayé la tactique de la concentration sur les "
+#~ "questions secondaires, vous savez… Quand les éditeurs "
+#~ "exigent plus de pouvoir, les gens habituellement disent que cela causera "
+#~ "un certain type de mal secondaire, et basent leurs arguments la-dessus. "
+#~ "Mais vous trouvez rarement quelqu'un (excepté moi) qui dit que le "
+#~ "point entier du changement est erroné, que c'est une erreur de le "
+#~ "limiter de cette façon, qu'il est légitime pour les gens de "
+#~ "vouloir changer les copies et que ça devrait leur être "
+#~ "permis. Nous devrions en avoir plus. Nous devons commencer à "
+#~ "couper la racine de leur domination et pas simplement entailler loin "
+#~ "quelques feuilles."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>AM14</strong>: <em>[inaudible]</em> this is important is to "
+#~ "concentrate on the donations system for music."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA14</strong> : <em>[inaudible]</em> ce qui est important, "
+#~ "c'est de se concentrer sur le système de donation pour la musique."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: Yes. Unfortunately though there are patents "
+#~ "covering the technique that seems most likely to be usable."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Oui. Bien que malheureusement, il y ait des "
+#~ "brevets couvrant la technique qui semblent être très "
+#~ "probablement utilisables."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<em>[laughs, cries of “no” from audience]</em>"
+#~ msgstr "<em>[rires, on crie «non» dans l'audience]</em>"
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>RMS</strong>: So it may take ten years before we can do it."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Cela peut mettre dix ans avant que ça "
+#~ "puisse se faire."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid "<strong>AM15</strong>: We only take French laws"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>MA15</strong> : On prendra seulement les lois franç"
+#~ "aises."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong>: I don't know. I think I'd better hand the floor "
+#~ "over to Melanie whose talk was supposed to start at 3. and uh so"
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "<strong>RMS</strong> : Je ne sais pas. Je pense que je devrais "
+#~ "rendre la parole à Mélanie dont l'entretien devait "
+#~ "commencer à trois heures. Et hue ! donc."
+
+# type: Content of: <p>
+#~ msgid ""
+#~ "RMS stands in silence. There is a pause before the outbreak of applause. "
+#~ "RMS turns to applaud the stuffed fabric gnu he placed on the overhead "
+#~ "projector at the beginning of the talk."
+#~ msgstr ""
+#~ "RMS reste silencieux. Il y a une pause avant le déclenchement des "
+#~ "applaudissements. RMS se tourne pour applaudir le Gnu bourré de "
+#~ "tissu qu'il a placé sur le rétro-projecteur au début "
+#~ "de l'entretien."
| [Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- www/philosophy copyright-versus-community-2000....,
Yavor Doganov <=