# LANGUAGE translation of https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/reevaluating-copyright.html # Copyright (C) YEAR Free Software Foundation, Inc. # This file is distributed under the same license as the original article. # FIRST AUTHOR , YEAR. # #, fuzzy msgid "" msgstr "" "Project-Id-Version: reevaluating-copyright.html\n" "POT-Creation-Date: 2021-10-03 08:55+0000\n" "PO-Revision-Date: YEAR-MO-DA HO:MI+ZONE\n" "Last-Translator: FULL NAME \n" "Language-Team: LANGUAGE \n" "Language: \n" "MIME-Version: 1.0\n" "Content-Type: text/plain; charset=CHARSET\n" "Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\n" #. type: Content of: msgid "" "Reevaluating Copyright: The Public Must Prevail - GNU Project - Free " "Software Foundation" msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><h2> msgid "Reevaluating Copyright: The Public Must Prevail" msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><address> msgid "" "by <a href=\"https://www.stallman.org/\">Richard Stallman</a> <a " "href=\"#ft1\"><sup>[1]</sup></a>" msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "The legal world is aware that digital information technology poses " "“problems for copyright,” but has not traced these problems to " "their root cause: a fundamental conflict between publishers of copyrighted " "works and the users of these works. The publishers, understanding their own " "interest, have set forth a proposal through the Clinton Administration to " "fix the “problems” by deciding the conflict in their favor. This " "proposal, the Lehman White Paper,<a href=\"#ft2\"><sup>[2]</sup></a> was the " "principal focus of the <cite>Innovation and the Information " "Environment</cite> conference at the University of Oregon (November 1995)." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "John Perry Barlow,<a href=\"#ft3\"><sup>[3]</sup></a> the keynote speaker, " "began the conference by telling us how the Greatful Dead recognized and " "dealt with this conflict. They decided it would be wrong to interfere with " "copying of their performances on tapes, or with distribution on the " "Internet, but saw nothing wrong in enforcing copyright for CD recordings of " "their music." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "Barlow did not analyze the reasons for treating these media differently, and " "later Gary Glisson <a href=\"#ft4\"><sup>[4]</sup></a> criticized " "Barlow's idea that the Internet is inexplicably unique and unlike anything " "else in the world. He argued that we should be able to determine the " "implications of the Internet for copyright policy by the same kind of " "analysis that we apply to other technologies. This paper attempts to do just " "that." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "Barlow suggested that our intuitions based on physical objects as property " "do not transfer to information as property because information is " "“abstract.” As Steven Winter <a " "href=\"#ft5\"><sup>[5]</sup></a> remarked, abstract property has existed for " "centuries. Shares in a company, commodity futures, and even paper money, are " "forms of property that are more or less abstract. Barlow and others who " "argue that information should be free do not reject these other kinds of " "abstract property. Clearly, the crucial difference between information and " "acceptable kinds of property is not abstractness per se. So what is it? I " "propose a simple and practical explanation." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "United States copyright law considers copyright a bargain between the public " "and “authors” (although in practice, usually publishers take " "over the authors' part of the bargain). The public trades certain freedoms " "in exchange for more published works to enjoy. Until the White Paper, our " "government had never proposed that the public should trade <b>all</b> of its " "freedom to use published works. Copyright involves giving up specific " "freedoms and retaining others. This means that there are many alternative " "bargains that the public could offer to publishers. So which bargain is the " "best one for the public? Which freedoms are worth while for the public to " "trade, and for what length of time? The answers depend on two things: how " "much additional publication the public will get for trading a given freedom, " "and how much the public benefits from keeping that freedom." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "This shows why making <a href=\"#later-1\">intellectual property " "decisions</a> by analogy to physical object property, or even to older " "intellectual property policies, is a mistake. Winter argued persuasively " "that it is possible to make such analogies, to stretch our old concepts and " "apply them to new decisions.<a href= \"#ft6\"><sup>[6]</sup></a> Surely this " "will reach some answer—but not a good answer. Analogy is not a useful " "way of deciding what to buy or at what price." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "For example, we do not decide whether to build a highway in New York City by " "analogy with a previous decision about a proposed highway in Iowa. In each " "highway construction decision, the same factors apply (cost, amount of " "traffic, taking of land or houses); if we made highway decisions by analogy " "to previous highway decisions, we would either build every proposed highway " "or none of them. Instead we judge each proposed highway based on the pros " "and cons, whose magnitudes vary from case to case. In copyright issues, too, " "we must weigh the cost and benefits for today's situation and today's media, " "not as they have applied to other media in the past." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "This also shows why Laurence Tribe's principle, that rights concerning " "speech should not depend on the choice of medium,<a " "href=\"#ft7\"><sup>[7]</sup></a> is not applicable to copyright " "decisions. Copyright is a bargain with the public, not a natural " "right. Copyright policy issues are about which bargains benefit the public, " "not about what rights publishers or readers are entitled to." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "The copyright system developed along with the printing press. In the age of " "the printing press, it was unfeasible for an ordinary reader to copy a " "book. Copying a book required a printing press, and ordinary readers did not " "have one. What's more, copying in this way was absurdly expensive unless " "many copies were made—which means, in effect, that only a publisher " "could copy a book economically." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "So when the public traded to publishers the freedom to copy books, they were " "selling something which they <b>could not use</b>. Trading something you " "cannot use for something useful and helpful is always good deal. Therefore, " "copyright was uncontroversial in the age of the printing press, precisely " "because it did not restrict anything the reading public might commonly do." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "But the age of the printing press is gradually ending. The xerox machine and " "the audio and video tape began the change; digital information technology " "brings it to fruition. These advances make it possible for ordinary people, " "not just publishers with specialized equipment, to copy. And they do!" msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "Once copying is a useful and practical activity for ordinary people, they " "are no longer so willing to give up the freedom to do it. They want to keep " "this freedom and exercise it instead of trading it away. The copyright " "bargain that we have is no longer a good deal for the public, and it is time " "to revise it—time for the law to recognize the public benefit that " "comes from making and sharing copies." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "With this analysis, we see why rejection of the old copyright bargain is not " "based on supposing that the Internet is ineffably unique. The Internet is " "relevant because it facilitates copying and sharing of writings by ordinary " "readers. The easier it is to copy and share, the more useful it becomes, and " "the more copyright as it stands now becomes a bad deal." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "This analysis also explains why it makes sense for the Grateful Dead to " "insist on copyright for CD manufacturing but not for individual copying. CD " "production works like the printing press; it is not feasible today for " "ordinary people, even computer owners, to copy a CD into another CD. Thus, " "copyright for publishing CDs of music remains painless for music listeners, " "just as all copyright was painless in the age of the printing press. To " "restrict copying the same music onto a digital audio tape does hurt the " "listeners, however, and they are entitled to reject this restriction. (1999 " "note: the practical situation for CDs has changed, in that many ordinary " "computer users can now copy CDs. This means that we should now consider CDs " "more like tapes. 2007 clarification: notwithstanding the improvement in CD " "technology, it still makes sense to apply copyright to commercial " "distribution while letting individuals copy freely.)" msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "We can also see why the abstractness of <a href=\"#later-1\">intellectual " "property</a> is not the crucial factor. Other forms of abstract property " "represent shares of something. Copying any kind of share is intrinsically a " "zero-sum activity; the person who copies benefits only by taking wealth away " "from everyone else. Copying a dollar bill in a color copier is effectively " "equivalent to shaving a small fraction off of every other dollar and adding " "these fractions together to make one dollar. Naturally, we consider this " "wrong." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "By contrast, copying useful, enlightening or entertaining information for a " "friend makes the world happier and better off; it benefits the friend, and " "inherently hurts no one. It is a constructive activity that strengthens " "social bonds." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "Some readers may question this statement because they know publishers claim " "that illegal copying causes them “loss.” This claim is mostly " "inaccurate and partly misleading. More importantly, it is begging the " "question." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><ul><li> msgid "" "The claim is mostly inaccurate because it presupposes that the friend would " "otherwise have bought a copy from the publisher. That is occasionally true, " "but more often false; and when it is false, the claimed loss does not occur." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><ul><li> msgid "" "The claim is partly misleading because the word “loss” suggests " "events of a very different nature—events in which something they have " "is taken away from them. For example, if the bookstore's stock of books were " "burned, or if the money in the register got torn up, that would really be a " "“loss.” We generally agree it is wrong to do these things to " "other people." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p> msgid "" "But when your friend avoids the need to buy a copy of a book, the bookstore " "and the publisher do not lose anything they had. A more fitting description " "would be that the bookstore and publisher get less income than they might " "have got. The same consequence can result if your friend decides to play " "bridge instead of reading a book. In a free market system, no business is " "entitled to cry “foul” just because a potential customer chooses " "not to deal with them." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><ul><li> msgid "" "The claim is begging the question because the idea of “loss” is " "based on the assumption that the publisher “should have” got " "paid. That is based on the assumption that copyright exists and prohibits " "individual copying. But that is just the issue at hand: what should " "copyright cover? If the public decides it can share copies, then the " "publisher is not entitled to expect to be paid for each copy, and so cannot " "claim there is a “loss” when it is not." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p> msgid "" "In other words, the “loss” comes from the copyright system; it " "is not an inherent part of copying. Copying in itself hurts no one." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "The most widely opposed provision of the White Paper is the system of " "collective responsibility, whereby a computer owner is required to monitor " "and control the activities of all users, on pain of being punished for " "actions in which he was not a participant but merely failed to actively " "prevent. Tim Sloan <a href=\"#ft8\"><sup>[8]</sup></a> pointed out " "that this gives copyright owners a privileged status not accorded to anyone " "else who might claim to be damaged by a computer user; for example, no one " "proposes to punish the computer owner if he fails actively to prevent a user " "from defaming someone. It is natural for a government to turn to collective " "responsibility for enforcing a law that many citizens do not believe in " "obeying. The more digital technology helps citizens share information, the " "more the government will need draconian methods to enforce copyright against " "ordinary citizens." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "When the United States Constitution was drafted, the idea that authors were " "entitled to a copyright monopoly was proposed—and rejected.<a " "href=\"#ft9\"><sup>[9]</sup></a> Instead, the founders of our country " "adopted a different idea of copyright, one which places the public first.<a " "href=\"#ft10\"><sup>[10]</sup></a> Copyright in the United States is " "supposed to exist for the sake of users; benefits for publishers and even " "for authors are not given for the sake of those parties, but only as an " "inducement to change their behavior. As the Supreme Court said in <cite>Fox " "Film Corp. v. Doyal</cite>: “The sole interest of the United States " "and the primary object in conferring the [copyright] monopoly lie in the " "general benefits derived by the public from the labors of authors.”<a " "href=\"#ft11\"><sup>[11]</sup></a>" msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "Under the Constitution's view of copyright, if the public prefers to be able " "to make copies in certain cases even if that means somewhat fewer works are " "published, the public's choice is decisive. There is no possible " "justification for prohibiting the public from copying what it wants to copy." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "Ever since the constitutional decision was made, publishers have tried to " "reverse it by misinforming the public. They do this by repeating arguments " "which presuppose that copyright is a natural right of authors (not " "mentioning that authors almost always cede it to publishers). People who " "hear these arguments, unless they have a firm awareness that this " "presupposition is contrary to the basic premises of our legal system, take " "for granted that it is the basis of that system." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "This error is so ingrained today that people who oppose new copyright powers " "feel the need to do so by arguing that even authors and publishers may be " "hurt by them. Thus, James Boyle <a href=\"#ft12\"><sup>[12]</sup></a> " "explains how a strict <a href=\"#later-2\">intellectual property system</a> " "can interfere with writing new works. Jessica Litman <a " "href=\"#ft13\"><sup>[13]</sup></a> cites the copyright shelters which " "historically allowed many new media to become popular. Pamela " "Samuelson <a href=\"#ft14\"><sup>[14]</sup></a> warns that the White " "Paper may block the development of “third-wave” information " "industries by locking the world into the “second-wave” economic " "model that fit the age of the printing press." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "These arguments can be very effective on those issues where they are " "available, especially with a Congress and Administration dominated by the " "idea that “What's good for General Media is good for the USA.” " "But they fail to expose the fundamental falsehood on which this domination " "is based; as a result, they are ineffective in the long term. When these " "arguments win one battle, they do so without building a general " "understanding that helps win the next battle. If we turn to these arguments " "too much and too often, the danger is that we may allow the publishers to " "replace the Constitution uncontested." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "For example, the recently published position statement of the Digital Future " "Coalition, an umbrella organization, lists many reasons to oppose the White " "Paper, for the sake of authors, libraries, education, poor Americans, " "technological progress, economic flexibility, and privacy concerns—all " "valid arguments, but concerned with side issues.<a " "href=\"#ft15\"><sup>[15]</sup></a> Conspicuously absent from the list is the " "most important reason of all: that many Americans (perhaps most) want to " "continue making copies. The DFC fails to criticize the core goal of the " "White Paper, which is to give more power to publishers, and its central " "decision, to reject the Constitution and place the publishers above the " "users. This silence may be taken for consent." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "Resisting the pressure for additional power for publishers depends on " "widespread awareness that the reading and listening public are paramount; " "that copyright exists for users and not vice versa. If the public is " "unwilling to accept certain copyright powers, that is ipso facto " "justification for not offering them. Only by reminding the public and the " "legislature of the purpose of copyright and the opportunity for the open " "flow of information can we ensure that the public prevails." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><h3> msgid "Later Notes" msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><ul><li> msgid "" "<em>Intellectual property:</em>  This article was part of the path that " "led me to recognize the <a href=\"/philosophy/not-ipr.html\"> bias and " "confusion in the term “intellectual property”</a>. Today I " "believe that term should never be used under any circumstances." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><ul><li> msgid "" "<em>Intellectual property system:</em>  Here I fell into the " "fashionable error of writing “intellectual property” when what I " "meant was just “copyright.” This is like writing " "“Europe” when you mean “France”—it causes " "confusion that is easy to avoid." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><div><ol><li> msgid "Published in <cite>Oregon Law Review</cite>, Spring 1996." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><div><ol><li> msgid "" "Informational Infrastructure Task Force, Intellectual Property and the " "National Information Infrastructure: <cite>The Report of the Working Group " "on Intellectual Property Rights</cite> (1995)." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><div><ol><li> msgid "" "John Perry Barlow, Remarks at the <cite>Innovation and the Information " "Environment Conference</cite> (Nov. 1995). Mr. Barlow is one of the " "founders of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an organization which " "promotes freedom of expression in digital media, and is also a former " "lyricist for the Grateful Dead." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><div><ol><li> msgid "" "Gary Glisson, Remarks at the <cite>Innovation and the Information " "Environment Conference</cite> (Nov. 1995); see also Gary Glisson, “A " "Practitioner's Defense of the NII White Paper,” 75 " "<cite>Or. L. Rev.</cite> (1996), supporting the White Paper. Mr. Glisson is " "a partner and chair of the Intellectual Property Group at Lane Powell Spears " "Lubersky in Portland, Oregon." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><div><ol><li> msgid "" "Steven Winter, Remarks at the <cite>Innovation and the Information " "Environment Conference</cite> (Nov. 1995). Mr. Winter is a professor at the " "University of Miami School of Law." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><div><ol><li> msgid "Winter, supra note 5." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><div><ol><li> msgid "" "See Laurence H. Tribe, “The Constitution in Cyberspace: Law and " "Liberty Beyond the Electronic Frontier,” <cite>Humanist</cite>, " "Sept.-Oct. 1991, at 15." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><div><ol><li> msgid "" "Tim Sloan, Remarks at the <cite>Innovation and the Information Environment " "Conference</cite> (Nov. 1995). Mr. Sloan is a member of the National " "Telecommunication and Information Administration." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><div><ol><li> msgid "" "See Jane C. Ginsburg, “A Tale of Two Copyrights: Literary Property in " "Revolutionary France and America,” in <cite>Of Authors and Origins: " "Essays on Copyright Law</cite> 131, 137-38 (Brad Sherman & Alain " "Strowel, eds., 1994), stating that the Constitution's framers either meant " "to “subordinate[] the author's interests to the public benefit,” " "or to “treat the private and public interests … " "even-handedly.”" msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><div><ol><li> msgid "" "<cite>U.S. Const.</cite>, art. I, p. 8, cl. 8 (“Congress shall have " "Power…to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing " "for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their " "respective Writings and Discoveries.”)" msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><div><ol><li> msgid "<cite>286 U.S. 123</cite>, 127 (1932)." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><div><ol><li> msgid "" "James Boyle, Remarks at the <cite>Innovation and the Information Environment " "Conference</cite> (Nov. 1995). Mr. Boyle is a Professor of Law at American " "University in Washington, D.C." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><div><ol><li> msgid "" "Jessica Litman, Remarks at the <cite>Innovation and the Information " "Environment Conference</cite> (Nov. 1995). Ms. Litman is a Professor at " "Wayne State University Law School in Detroit, Michigan." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><div><ol><li> msgid "" "Pamela Samuelson, “The Copyright Grab,” <cite>Wired</cite>, " "Jan. 1996. Ms. Samuelson is a Professor at Cornell Law School." msgstr "" #. (available at URL: #. home.worldweb.net/dfc/press.html</a> #. ) #. type: Content of: <div><div><ol><li> msgid "" "Digital Future Coalition, “Broad-Based Coalition Expresses Concern " "Over Intellectual Property Proposals,” Nov. 15, 1995." msgstr "" #. TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't have notes. #. type: Content of: <div> msgid "*GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S NOTES*" msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><div><p> msgid "" "Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to <a " "href=\"mailto:gnu@gnu.org\"><gnu@gnu.org></a>. There are also <a " "href=\"/contact/\">other ways to contact</a> the FSF. Broken links and " "other corrections or suggestions can be sent to <a " "href=\"mailto:webmasters@gnu.org\"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>." msgstr "" #. TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph, #. replace it with the translation of these two: # #. We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality #. translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection. #. Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard #. to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org"> # #. <web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p> # #. <p>For information on coordinating and contributing translations of #. our web pages, see <a #. href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations #. README</a>. #. type: Content of: <div><div><p> msgid "" "Please see the <a " "href=\"/server/standards/README.translations.html\">Translations README</a> " "for information on coordinating and contributing translations of this " "article." msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "Copyright © 1996, 1999, 2006, 2007, 2021 Richard Stallman" msgstr "" #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "" "This page is licensed under a <a rel=\"license\" " "href=\"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/\">Creative Commons " "Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>." msgstr "" #. TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits. #. type: Content of: <div><div> msgid "*GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S CREDITS*" msgstr "" #. timestamp start #. type: Content of: <div><p> msgid "Updated:" msgstr ""