In the past fifteen years, file sharing of digital cultural works between individuals has been at the center of a number of debates on the future of culture itself. To some, sharing constitutes ...piracy, to be fought against and eradicated. Others see it as unavoidable, and table proposals to compensate for its harmful effects. Meanwhile, little progress has been made towards addressing the real challenges facing culture in a digital world. Sharing starts from a radically different viewpoint, namely that the non-market sharing of digital works is both legitimate and useful. It supports this premise with empirical research, demonstrating that non-market sharing leads to more diversity in the attention given to various works. Taking stock of what we have learned about the cultural economy in recent years, Sharing sets out the conditions necessary for valuable cultural functions to remain sustainable in this context. Our software and datasets can be downloaded from the book site at http://www.sharing-thebook.net. On the same site, the reader can also run our models with adjusted parameters and upload datasets in order to run our algorithms for the study of diversity of attention.
Voor sommigen staat delen gelijk aan piraterij: iets wat moet worden bestreden. Anderen zien het als deel van het moderne leven en proberen de schadelijke effecten zoveel mogelijk te compenseren. Ondertussen wordt er weinig vooruitgang geboekt in het aanpakken van de echte problemen waar- mee de cultuur te maken krijgt wanneer steeds meer mensen kunnen bijdragen aan het produceren van cultureel waardevolle werken. Sharing stelt dat het niet-commercieel delen van digitale werken zowel legitiem als nuttig is, omdat het leidt tot meer diversiteit in de digitale culturele wereld. Sharing bespreekt nieuwe financieringsregelingen die geschikt zijn voor een digitale culturele sfeer waar werken vrijelijk gedeeld kunnen worden door individuen. Voor meer informatie over het boek, bezoek: www.sharing-thebook.net
L’article pose la question suivante : pourquoi Illich n’a pas développé une vision alternative de l’informatique alors qu’il aurait pu y être poussé par son approche des techniques ? On commence par ...étayer l’affirmation selon laquelle Illich disposait notamment avec son concept de monopole radical des outils nécessaires à la construction d’une vision alternative de l’informatique, si ce n’est dans les années 1970, du moins dans les années 1980 après la naissance de l’informatique personnelle. Analysant les raisons qui ont pu pousser Illich à conserver une vision essentialiste et négative de l’informatique, on pointe en particulier sa vision de la lecture, profondément enracinée dans ses positions religieuses, et le fait qu’il persiste à considérer l’informatique comme une technologie et non comme vecteur d’une mutation anthropologique.
In the past fifteen years, file sharing of digital cultural works between individuals has been at the center of a number of debates on the future of culture itself. To some, sharing constitutes ...piracy, to be fought against and eradicated. Others see it as unavoidable, and table proposals to compensate for its harmful effects. Meanwhile, little progress has been made towards addressing the real challenges facing culture in a digital world. Sharing starts from a radically different viewpoint, namely that the non-market sharing of digital works is both legitimate and useful. It supports this premise with empirical research, demonstrating that non-market sharing leads to more diversity in the attention given to various works. Taking stock of what we have learned about the cultural economy in recent years, Sharing sets out the conditions necessary for valuable cultural functions to remain sustainable in this context. Our software and datasets can be downloaded from the book site at http://www.sharing-thebook.net. On the same site, the reader can also run our models with adjusted parameters and upload datasets in order to run our algorithms for the study of diversity of attention.
RésuméLorsque les industries ont cherché à reprendre le contrôle sur les espaces ouverts par les technologies de l’information, la construction de biens communs, différenciée selon les champs ...d’application, est devenue un modèle alternatif de production, proche de ce qui se cherchait dans le champ de l’environnement. Mais la politique mondiale dans ces domaines en reste pour l’essentiel aux bonnes intentions. Une nouvelle manière d’évaluer l’économie en termes de développement humain s’est faite jour, qui donne à espérer qu’on trouvera les modalités de gestion économique adéquates à ces nouvelles pratiques.
Many thinkers try to tackle issues of economic sustainability for the creative commons, analysing it under present conditions. In contrast, few ask themselves what would a society where many create ...for many look like. The main drawback of a focus on direct economic sustainability is that it may lead to ignore the present development of societal exchange patterns that are only indirectly coupled with the economy, but outline possible paths of development. This paper analyses the possible structure of a many–to–many commons–based information society from a variety of interdependent viewpoints, each associated with models and quantitative indicators. The paper discusses the distribution of attention and reputation over sets of works; the number of works in a given media; and, the degree of symmetry between creation and reception of contents.
It concludes that many of the present models and estimates are biased by the present economic conditions of media services and that some commonly accepted “laws” are mistaken regarding diversity in a many–to–many information society. It discusses policy issues regarding how to make creative commons sustainable in this light.
We are all accustomed to a dogmatic view of copyright, which is more about forbidding certain things than ensuring certain outcomes. For those who promote this view, the idea of allowing people who ...are neither the authors nor the copyright holders of a piece of work to share it with other individuals is tantamount to heresy. Article 27.2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (quoted earlier) should serve as a reminder that this has not always been the dominant view. To interpret this article in its fullest sense, we must take into accountanymeans of promoting the material
In recent years, a lively debate has developed in countries where proposals involving a flat-rate contribution of Internet users to creative activity were made with a view to acknowledge or legalize ...file sharing. Most of these proposals differ from the one developed in this book because they adopted a compensatory vision of the contribution. In this chapter, we consider some of the most common criticisms. Some of them we took into account when designing our own proposal, so that they do not apply to it.
We attempt to provide short and clear answers to key points or questions, in the
The best proposals can turn into a bureaucratic nightmare, or fail to serve their intended aims, if their implementation is inadequate. The challenge is made harder by the fact that organizational ...issues are no fun. Internet users and creative people (two very much overlapping categories) are not particularly keen on creating organizations, specially not when they have to deal with the large-scale management of money. They often create ad hoc organizations that handle the complex logistics of a project, or art and advocacy collectives. They are often entrepreneurs, engineers of these lightweight virtual corporations which have recently received some legal
PDF
