Flere indexoppføringer.

diff --git a/freeculture.xml b/freeculture.xml
index a71d4df2a04f6e03c52757ea12b180f1b471e9c5..dd831fab0a50b52dc6e72302f6b52055dec3580b 100644 (file)
--- a/freeculture.xml
+++ b/freeculture.xml
@@ -305,6 +305,7 @@ disinterested, then the story I tell here will trouble you. For the
 changes I describe affect values that both sides of our political
 culture deem fundamental.
 </para>
 changes I describe affect values that both sides of our political
 culture deem fundamental.
 </para>

+<indexterm><primary>CodePink Women in Peace</primary></indexterm>

 <para>
 We saw a glimpse of this bipartisan outrage in the early summer of
 2003. As the FCC considered changes in media ownership rules that
 <para>
 We saw a glimpse of this bipartisan outrage in the early summer of
 2003. As the FCC considered changes in media ownership rules that


@@ -6155,40 +6156,38 @@ understand the effective protection of liberty or protection of
 property at any particular moment, we must track these changes over
 time. A restriction imposed by one modality might be erased by
 another. A freedom enabled by one modality might be displaced by
 property at any particular moment, we must track these changes over
 time. A restriction imposed by one modality might be erased by
 another. A freedom enabled by one modality might be displaced by

-another.<footnote><para>
+another.<footnote>
+<indexterm><primary>Commons, John R.</primary></indexterm>
+<para>

 <!-- f4  -->
 <!-- f4  -->

-Some people object to this way of talking about "liberty." They object 
-               because
-their focus when considering the constraints that exist at any 
-               particular
-moment are constraints imposed exclusively by the government. For
-instance, if a storm destroys a bridge, these people think it is meaningless
-to say that one's liberty has been restrained. A bridge has washed out, and
-it's harder to get from one place to another. To talk about this as a loss of
-freedom, they say, is to confuse the stuff of politics with the vagaries of 
-               ordinary
-life.
-I don't mean to deny the value in this narrower view, which depends
-upon the context of the inquiry. I do, however, mean to argue against any
-insistence that this narrower view is the only proper view of liberty. As I
-argued in Code, we come from a long tradition of political thought with a
-broader focus than the narrow question of what the government did when.
-John Stuart Mill defended freedom of speech, for example, from the
-tyranny of narrow minds, not from the fear of government prosecution;
-John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (Indiana: Hackett Publishing Co., 1978), 19.
-John R. Commons famously defended the economic freedom of labor
-from constraints imposed by the market; John R. Commons, "The Right
-to Work," in Malcom Rutherford and Warren J. Samuels, eds., John R.
-Commons: Selected Essays (London: Routledge: 1997), 62. The Americans
-with Disabilities Act increases the liberty of people with physical 
-               disabilities
-by changing the architecture of certain public places, thereby making
-access to those places easier; 42 United States Code, section 12101 (2000).
-Each of these interventions to change existing conditions changes the
-liberty of a particular group. The effect of those interventions should be
-accounted for in order to understand the effective liberty that each of these
-groups might face.
-</para></footnote>
+Some people object to this way of talking about "liberty." They object
+because their focus when considering the constraints that exist at any
+particular moment are constraints imposed exclusively by the
+government. For instance, if a storm destroys a bridge, these people
+think it is meaningless to say that one's liberty has been
+restrained. A bridge has washed out, and it's harder to get from one
+place to another. To talk about this as a loss of freedom, they say,
+is to confuse the stuff of politics with the vagaries of ordinary
+life.  I don't mean to deny the value in this narrower view, which
+depends upon the context of the inquiry. I do, however, mean to argue
+against any insistence that this narrower view is the only proper view
+of liberty. As I argued in Code, we come from a long tradition of
+political thought with a broader focus than the narrow question of
+what the government did when.  John Stuart Mill defended freedom of
+speech, for example, from the tyranny of narrow minds, not from the
+fear of government prosecution; John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (Indiana:
+Hackett Publishing Co., 1978), 19.  John R. Commons famously defended
+the economic freedom of labor from constraints imposed by the market;
+John R. Commons, "The Right to Work," in Malcom Rutherford and Warren
+J. Samuels, eds., John R.  Commons: Selected Essays (London:
+Routledge: 1997), 62. The Americans with Disabilities Act increases
+the liberty of people with physical disabilities by changing the
+architecture of certain public places, thereby making access to those
+places easier; 42 United States Code, section 12101 (2000).  Each of
+these interventions to change existing conditions changes the liberty
+of a particular group. The effect of those interventions should be
+accounted for in order to understand the effective liberty that each
+of these groups might face.  </para></footnote>

 </para>
 <sect2 id="hollywood">
 <title>Why Hollywood Is Right</title>
 </para>
 <sect2 id="hollywood">
 <title>Why Hollywood Is Right</title>


@@ -12915,6 +12914,7 @@ something more than the handmaiden of the most powerful interests.
 It might be crazy to argue that we should preserve a tradition that has
 been part of our tradition for most of our history&mdash;free culture.
 </para>
 It might be crazy to argue that we should preserve a tradition that has
 been part of our tradition for most of our history&mdash;free culture.
 </para>

+<indexterm><primary>CodePink Women in Peace</primary></indexterm>

 <para>
 If this is crazy, then let there be more crazies. Soon.  There are
 moments of hope in this struggle. And moments that surprise. When the
 <para>
 If this is crazy, then let there be more crazies. Soon.  There are
 moments of hope in this struggle. And moments that surprise. When the


@@ -13375,37 +13375,32 @@ The same strategy could be applied to culture, as a response to the
 control effected through law and technology.
 </para>
 <para>
 control effected through law and technology.
 </para>
 <para>

-Enter the Creative Commons. The Creative Commons is a 
-               nonprofit
+Enter the Creative Commons. The Creative Commons is a nonprofit

 corporation established in Massachusetts, but with its home at
 corporation established in Massachusetts, but with its home at

-Stanford University. Its aim is to build a layer of reasonable copyright
-on top of the extremes that now reign. It does this by making it easy for
-people to build upon other people's work, by making it simple for 
-               creators
-to express the freedom for others to take and build upon their
-work. Simple tags, tied to human-readable descriptions, tied to 
-               bulletproof
-licenses, make this possible.
-</para>
-<para>
-Simple&mdash;which means without a middleman, or without a lawyer.
-By developing a free set of licenses that people can attach to their
-content, Creative Commons aims to mark a range of content that
-can easily, and reliably, be built upon. These tags are then linked to
-machine-readable versions of the license that enable computers 
-               automatically
-to identify content that can easily be shared. These three 
-               expressions
-together&mdash;a legal license, a human-readable description, and
+Stanford University. Its aim is to build a layer of reasonable
+copyright on top of the extremes that now reign. It does this by
+making it easy for people to build upon other people's work, by making
+it simple for creators to express the freedom for others to take and
+build upon their work. Simple tags, tied to human-readable
+descriptions, tied to bulletproof licenses, make this possible.
+</para>
+<para>
+Simple&mdash;which means without a middleman, or without a lawyer.  By
+developing a free set of licenses that people can attach to their
+content, Creative Commons aims to mark a range of content that can
+easily, and reliably, be built upon. These tags are then linked to
+machine-readable versions of the license that enable computers
+automatically to identify content that can easily be shared. These
+three expressions together&mdash;a legal license, a human-readable
+description, and

 <!-- PAGE BREAK 288 -->
 machine-readable tags&mdash;constitute a Creative Commons license. A
 <!-- PAGE BREAK 288 -->
 machine-readable tags&mdash;constitute a Creative Commons license. A

-Creative Commons license constitutes a grant of freedom to anyone
-who accesses the license, and more importantly, an expression of the
-ideal that the person associated with the license believes in something
+Creative Commons license constitutes a grant of freedom to anyone who
+accesses the license, and more importantly, an expression of the ideal
+that the person associated with the license believes in something

 different than the "All" or "No" extremes. Content is marked with the
 different than the "All" or "No" extremes. Content is marked with the

-CC mark, which does not mean that copyright is waived, but that 
-               certain
-freedoms are given.
+CC mark, which does not mean that copyright is waived, but that
+certain freedoms are given.

 </para>
 <para>
 These freedoms are beyond the freedoms promised by fair use. Their
 </para>
 <para>
 These freedoms are beyond the freedoms promised by fair use. Their


@@ -14037,30 +14032,25 @@ rights regime, that reuse would earn artists more income.
 <sect2 id="liberatemusic">
 <title>4. Liberate the Music&mdash;Again</title>
 <para>
 <sect2 id="liberatemusic">
 <title>4. Liberate the Music&mdash;Again</title>
 <para>

-The battle that got this whole war going was about music, so it wouldn't
-be fair to end this book without addressing the issue that is, to most
-people, most pressing&mdash;music. There is no other policy issue that 
-               better
-teaches the lessons of this book than the battles around the sharing
-of music.
+The battle that got this whole war going was about music, so it
+wouldn't be fair to end this book without addressing the issue that
+is, to most people, most pressing&mdash;music. There is no other
+policy issue that better teaches the lessons of this book than the
+battles around the sharing of music.

 </para>
 <para>
 </para>
 <para>

-The appeal of file-sharing music was the crack cocaine of the 
-               Internet's
-growth. It drove demand for access to the Internet more 
-               powerfully
-than any other single application. It was the Internet's killer
-app&mdash;possibly in two senses of that word. It no doubt was the 
-               application
-that drove demand for bandwidth. It may well be the application
-that drives demand for regulations that in the end kill innovation on
-the network.
-</para>
-<para>
-The aim of copyright, with respect to content in general and music
-in particular, is to create the incentives for music to be composed, 
-               performed,
-and, most importantly, spread. The law does this by giving
+The appeal of file-sharing music was the crack cocaine of the
+Internet's growth. It drove demand for access to the Internet more
+powerfully than any other single application. It was the Internet's
+killer app&mdash;possibly in two senses of that word. It no doubt was
+the application that drove demand for bandwidth. It may well be the
+application that drives demand for regulations that in the end kill
+innovation on the network.
+</para>
+<para>
+The aim of copyright, with respect to content in general and music in
+particular, is to create the incentives for music to be composed,
+performed, and, most importantly, spread. The law does this by giving

 an exclusive right to a composer to control public performances of his
 work, and to a performing artist to control copies of her performance.
 </para>
 an exclusive right to a composer to control public performances of his
 work, and to a performing artist to control copies of her performance.
 </para>


@@ -14084,17 +14074,15 @@ on the way to purchasing CDs.
 <listitem><para>
 <!-- PAGE BREAK 302 -->
 <!-- C. -->
 <listitem><para>
 <!-- PAGE BREAK 302 -->
 <!-- C. -->

-There are many who are using file-sharing networks to get 
-               access
-to content that is no longer sold but is still under copyright
-or that would have been too cumbersome to buy off the Net.
+There are many who are using file-sharing networks to get access to
+content that is no longer sold but is still under copyright or that
+would have been too cumbersome to buy off the Net.

 </para></listitem>
 <listitem><para>
 <!-- D. -->
 </para></listitem>
 <listitem><para>
 <!-- D. -->

-There are many who are using file-sharing networks to get 
-               access
-to content that is not copyrighted or to get access that the
-copyright owner plainly endorses.
+There are many who are using file-sharing networks to get access to
+content that is not copyrighted or to get access that the copyright
+owner plainly endorses.

 </para></listitem>
 </orderedlist>
 <para>
 </para></listitem>
 </orderedlist>
 <para>


@@ -14106,11 +14094,11 @@ effect of sharing is actually not very harmful, the need for regulation is
 significantly weakened.
 </para>
 <para>
 significantly weakened.
 </para>
 <para>

-As I said in chapter 5, the actual harm caused by sharing is 
-               controversial.
-For the purposes of this chapter, however, I assume the harm is
-real. I assume, in other words, that type A sharing is significantly
-greater than type B, and is the dominant use of sharing networks.
+As I said in chapter 5, the actual harm caused by sharing is
+controversial.  For the purposes of this chapter, however, I assume
+the harm is real. I assume, in other words, that type A sharing is
+significantly greater than type B, and is the dominant use of sharing
+networks.

 </para>
 <para>
 Nonetheless, there is a crucial fact about the current technological
 </para>
 <para>
 Nonetheless, there is a crucial fact about the current technological


@@ -14118,17 +14106,16 @@ context that we must keep in mind if we are to understand how the law
 should respond.
 </para>
 <para>
 should respond.
 </para>
 <para>

-Today, file sharing is addictive. In ten years, it won't be. It is addictive
-today because it is the easiest way to gain access to a broad range of 
-               content.
-It won't be the easiest way to get access to a broad range of content
-in ten years. Today, access to the Internet is cumbersome and slow&mdash;we
-in the United States are lucky to have broadband service at 1.5 MBs, and
-very rarely do we get service at that speed both up and down. Although
-wireless access is growing, most of us still get access across wires. Most
-only gain access through a machine with a keyboard. The idea of the 
-               always
-on, always connected Internet is mainly just an idea.
+Today, file sharing is addictive. In ten years, it won't be. It is
+addictive today because it is the easiest way to gain access to a
+broad range of content.  It won't be the easiest way to get access to
+a broad range of content in ten years. Today, access to the Internet
+is cumbersome and slow&mdash;we in the United States are lucky to have
+broadband service at 1.5 MBs, and very rarely do we get service at
+that speed both up and down. Although wireless access is growing, most
+of us still get access across wires. Most only gain access through a
+machine with a keyboard. The idea of the always on, always connected
+Internet is mainly just an idea.

 </para>
 <para>
 But it will become a reality, and that means the way we get access to
 </para>
 <para>
 But it will become a reality, and that means the way we get access to


@@ -14136,38 +14123,35 @@ the Internet today is a technology in transition. Policy makers should
 not make policy on the basis of technology in transition. They should
 <!-- PAGE BREAK 303 -->
 make policy on the basis of where the technology is going. The
 not make policy on the basis of technology in transition. They should
 <!-- PAGE BREAK 303 -->
 make policy on the basis of where the technology is going. The

-       question
-should not be, how should the law regulate sharing in this world?
-The question should be, what law will we require when the network
-becomes the network it is clearly becoming? That network is one in
-which every machine with electricity is essentially on the Net; where
-everywhere you are&mdash;except maybe the desert or the Rockies&mdash;you can
-instantaneously be connected to the Internet. Imagine the Internet as
-ubiquitous as the best cell-phone service, where with the flip of a 
-               device,
-you are connected.
-</para>
-<para>
-In that world, it will be extremely easy to connect to services that
-give you access to content on the fly&mdash;such as Internet radio, content
-that is streamed to the user when the user demands. Here, then, is the
-critical point: When it is extremely easy to connect to services that give
-access to content, it will be easier to connect to services that give you
-access to content than it will be to download and store content on the
-many devices you will have for playing content. It will be easier, in other
-words, to subscribe than it will be to be a database manager, as 
-               everyone
-in the download-sharing world of Napster-like technologies 
-               essentially
-is. Content services will compete with content sharing, even if
-the services charge money for the content they give access to. Already
-cell-phone services in Japan offer music (for a fee) streamed over cell
-phones (enhanced with plugs for headphones). The Japanese are 
-               paying
-for this content even though "free" content is available in the form
-of MP3s across the Web.<footnote><para>
-<!-- f8. --> See, for example, "Music Media Watch," The J@pan Inc. Newsletter,
-3 April 2002, available at 
+question should not be, how should the law regulate sharing in this
+world?  The question should be, what law will we require when the
+network becomes the network it is clearly becoming? That network is
+one in which every machine with electricity is essentially on the Net;
+where everywhere you are&mdash;except maybe the desert or the
+Rockies&mdash;you can instantaneously be connected to the
+Internet. Imagine the Internet as ubiquitous as the best cell-phone
+service, where with the flip of a device, you are connected.
+</para>
+<para>
+In that world, it will be extremely easy to connect to services
+that give you access to content on the fly&mdash;such as Internet
+radio, content that is streamed to the user when the user
+demands. Here, then, is the critical point: When it is extremely easy
+to connect to services that give access to content, it will be easier
+to connect to services that give you access to content than it will be
+to download and store content on the many devices you will have for
+playing content. It will be easier, in other words, to subscribe than
+it will be to be a database manager, as everyone in the
+download-sharing world of Napster-like technologies essentially
+is. Content services will compete with content sharing, even if the
+services charge money for the content they give access to. Already
+cell-phone services in Japan offer music (for a fee) streamed over
+cell phones (enhanced with plugs for headphones). The Japanese are
+paying for this content even though "free" content is available in the
+form of MP3s across the Web.<footnote><para>
+<!-- f8. -->
+See, for example, "Music Media Watch," The J@pan Inc. Newsletter, 3
+April 2002, available at

 <ulink url="http://free-culture.cc/notes/">link #76</ulink>.
 </para></footnote>
 
 <ulink url="http://free-culture.cc/notes/">link #76</ulink>.
 </para></footnote>
 


@@ -14219,14 +14203,13 @@ from the author's perspective, this "sharing" of his content without
 his being compensated is less than ideal.
 </para>
 <para>
 his being compensated is less than ideal.
 </para>
 <para>

-The model of used book stores suggests that the law could simply
-deem out-of-print music fair game. If the publisher does not make
-copies of the music available for sale, then commercial and 
-               noncommercial
+The model of used book stores suggests that the law could simply deem
+out-of-print music fair game. If the publisher does not make copies of
+the music available for sale, then commercial and noncommercial

 providers would be free, under this rule, to "share" that content,
 providers would be free, under this rule, to "share" that content,

-even though the sharing involved making a copy. The copy here would
-be incidental to the trade; in a context where commercial publishing
-has ended, trading music should be as free as trading books.
+even though the sharing involved making a copy. The copy here would be
+incidental to the trade; in a context where commercial publishing has
+ended, trading music should be as free as trading books.

 </para>
 <para>
 
 </para>
 <para>