Add a few missing <emphasis>.

diff --git a/freeculture.xml b/freeculture.xml
index 342e1090e788844e871daf2656ef1725c03424f7..6417fb0cfa51373eaf9db498c7a6114479ffe483 100644 (file)
--- a/freeculture.xml
+++ b/freeculture.xml
@@ -306,7 +306,8 @@ software, or "code," functioned as a kind of law—and his review
 suggested the happy thought that if life in cyberspace got bad, we
 could always "drizzle, drazzle, druzzle, drome"-like simply flip a
 switch and be back home. Turn off the modem, unplug the computer, and
 suggested the happy thought that if life in cyberspace got bad, we
 could always "drizzle, drazzle, druzzle, drome"-like simply flip a
 switch and be back home. Turn off the modem, unplug the computer, and

-any troubles that exist in that space wouldn't "affect" us anymore.
+any troubles that exist in <emphasis>that</emphasis> space wouldn't
+"affect" us anymore.

 </para>
 <para>
 Pogue might have been right in 1999&mdash;I'm skeptical, but maybe.
 </para>
 <para>
 Pogue might have been right in 1999&mdash;I'm skeptical, but maybe.


@@ -331,17 +332,18 @@ pages that follow, we come from a tradition of "free culture"&mdash;not
 free software movement<footnote>
 <para>
 Richard M. Stallman, Free Software, Free Societies 57 (Joshua Gay, ed. 2002).
 free software movement<footnote>
 <para>
 Richard M. Stallman, Free Software, Free Societies 57 (Joshua Gay, ed. 2002).

-</para></footnote>), but "free" as in "free speech," "free markets," "free
-trade," "free enterprise," "free will," and "free elections." A free
-culture supports and protects creators and innovators. It does this
-directly by granting intellectual property rights. But it does so
+</para></footnote>), but "free" as in "free speech," "free markets,"
+"free trade," "free enterprise," "free will," and "free elections." A
+free culture supports and protects creators and innovators. It does
+this directly by granting intellectual property rights. But it does so

 indirectly by limiting the reach of those rights, to guarantee that
 indirectly by limiting the reach of those rights, to guarantee that

-follow-on creators and innovators remain as free as possible from the
-control of the past. A free culture is not a culture without property,
-just as a free market is not a market in which everything is free. The
-opposite of a free culture is a "permission culture"&mdash;a culture in
-which creators get to create only with the permission of the powerful,
-or of creators from the past.
+follow-on creators and innovators remain <emphasis>as free as
+possible</emphasis> from the control of the past. A free culture is
+not a culture without property, just as a free market is not a market
+in which everything is free. The opposite of a free culture is a
+"permission culture"&mdash;a culture in which creators get to create
+only with the permission of the powerful, or of creators from the
+past.

 </para>
 <para>
 If we understood this change, I believe we would resist it. Not "we"
 </para>
 <para>
 If we understood this change, I believe we would resist it. Not "we"


@@ -956,8 +958,9 @@ amazed by the power of this idea of intellectual property and, more
 importantly, its power to disable critical thought by policy makers
 and citizens. There has never been a time in our history when more of
 our "culture" was as "owned" as it is now. And yet there has never
 importantly, its power to disable critical thought by policy makers
 and citizens. There has never been a time in our history when more of
 our "culture" was as "owned" as it is now. And yet there has never

-been a time when the concentration of power to control the uses of
-culture has been as unquestioningly accepted as it is now.
+been a time when the concentration of power to control the
+<emphasis>uses</emphasis> of culture has been as unquestioningly
+accepted as it is now.

 </para>
 <para>
 The puzzle is, Why?  Is it because we have come to understand a truth
 </para>
 <para>
 The puzzle is, Why?  Is it because we have come to understand a truth