[FC-discuss] FreeCulture.org is now Students for Free Culture

[Crosbie Fitch]

I think MJ Ray has summed things up very well indeed.
 
I don't doubt that students may well provide the greatest resource for
FC.org in terms of mobilisation and organisation (the '.org' bit), I'm just
slightly concerned that the nature of the constituents is creeping into the
mission (the 'FC' bit). Maybe that's just the way it goes. If you don't turn
up, you don't get included - in the organisation or its mission.
 
Nevertheless, a strongly student aligned movement is likely to only obtain
student aligned concessions - at best. I can easily imagine university
campuses obtaining an educational exemption from copyright infringement as
long as all unauthorised copies/derivatives are digitally signed (or have
other DRM) and are not distributed outside the university networks.
 
As for me having an idea to set up a new non-student oriented movement, I
don't think I had that idea. I was merely thinking that FC.org, despite its
student constituency, might reconsider whether it really needed to reinforce
this aspect in its mission title. There is a danger that rather than explain
the constituency it instead distorts the motivation and the mission, i.e. it
is not students promoting free culture for all, but students demanding free
culture for themselves - as in "Students for Free Beer".
 
However, Conor, if you'd like to set up a new movement, that's up to you,
and I have no claim to the names. I think it would be best to avoid
splintering. It did seem strange to have http://freeculture.org
<http://freeculture.org>  and http://www.freeculture.org.uk/
<http://www.freeculture.org.uk/>   (see
http://freeculture.org/blog/2005/09/22/free-culture-uk/
<http://freeculture.org/blog/2005/09/22/free-culture-uk/> ). I'm interested
in any movement towards free culture (for everyone). I'd also be interested
in a movement toward copyright abolition.
 
In practical terms I have far more interests than time. I am dedicating my
time toward the promotion and development of non-copyright based revenue
mechanisms in order to try and demonstrate that a voluntary exchange of art
for money in a free market is a better thing than the compulsory suspension
of liberty (copyright) or confiscation of money (taxation). These are the
domain names I've used in this area: www.digitalartauction.com
<http://www.digitalartauction.com> ,  www.digitalproductions.co.uk,
<http://www.digitalproductions.co.uk,>  www.quidmusic.com
<http://www.quidmusic.com> , www.contingencymarket.com
<http://www.contingencymarket.com>  
 
So, my post wasn't out of indignation that FC.org isn't including l'il ol'
me, but to express concern that FC.org may be in danger of being
unnecessarily exclusive - which may not be in FC.org's best interests. Who
knows?


  _____  

From: Conor Schaefer [mailto:conor.schaefer at gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, 3 October 2007 9:03am
To: Discussion of Free Culture in general and this organization in
particular
Subject: Re: [FC-discuss] FreeCulture.org is now Students for Free Culture


Interesting to know some background on this. Nonetheless, I think there is a
void to be filled; as I said early, diversity can help us, no? I understand
there's the issue of achieving and maintaining molarity of interested
persons, a point Christina made earlier, but I don't think we're running
that risk here. In fact, I think we can reach out to many more people by
setting up shop with a label different from FC.org/SFFC, which would operate
in addition to it.

Since it was Crosbie's idea, I'm going to wait awhile, offering him the
initiative. I googled for "artists for free culture" and got zero hits.
That's bad! I'd like to buy the domain name www.artistsforfreeculture.org
<http://www.artistsforfreeculture.org>  and get things moving.

But for the time being, I say we defer to Crosbie's initiative. What say
you, good sir?

Conor

MJ Ray wrote: 

"Fred Benenson"  <mailto:fred.benenson at gmail.com> <fred.benenson at gmail.com>
wrote:

  

Crosbie: why not consider an organization such as iCommons which has much

broader goals and membership?

    



I can't speak for Crosbie, but I think Crosbie is on this list mainly

for the same reason I am, because freeculture-UK was closed down in

its favour.  As I understand it, iCommons has anti-commercialism

written into its foundations (thereby closing it off from artists who

need to make money from their free culture creations), uses hum-votes

to makes decisions and doesn't record its meetings.



If there must be another "open and free culture" group, then we'll get

there eventually, but there's a natural desire to avoid duplication of

overheads.  It's disappointing to see so many missed opportunities and

this vital task left to telling the Crosbies of this world to go DIY,

instead of incorporating their support into your efforts.



Hope that explains,

  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://freeculture.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20071003/c4237fa5/attachment.htm