-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
cright.html
409 lines (399 loc) · 24.9 KB
/
cright.html
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="en">
<head>
<meta charset="utf-8" />
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0" /><meta name="generator" content="Docutils 0.19: https://docutils.sourceforge.io/" />
<title>Treatise on copyright and preservation of information — Nothing special</title>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="_static/pygments.css" />
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="_static/classic.css" />
<script data-url_root="./" id="documentation_options" src="_static/documentation_options.js"></script>
<script src="_static/doctools.js"></script>
<script src="_static/sphinx_highlight.js"></script>
<link rel="index" title="Index" href="genindex.html" />
<link rel="search" title="Search" href="search.html" />
<link rel="copyright" title="Copyright" href="copyright.html" />
</head><body>
<div class="related" role="navigation" aria-label="related navigation">
<h3>Navigation</h3>
<ul>
<li class="right" style="margin-right: 10px">
<a href="genindex.html" title="General Index"
accesskey="I">index</a></li>
<li class="nav-item nav-item-0"><a href="index.html">Nothing special</a> »</li>
<li class="nav-item nav-item-this"><a href="">Treatise on copyright and preservation of information</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="document">
<div class="documentwrapper">
<div class="bodywrapper">
<div class="body" role="main">
<section id="treatise-on-copyright-and-preservation-of-information">
<h1>Treatise on copyright and preservation of information<a class="headerlink" href="#treatise-on-copyright-and-preservation-of-information" title="Permalink to this heading">¶</a></h1>
<blockquote>
<div><p>In this essay I will try to argue in favor of three major points related
to copyright on the creative works in the digital age.</p>
<ol class="arabic simple">
<li><p>Creative works must be seen as information bundles in the most general
sense and described in terms of digital communication theory.</p></li>
<li><p>Domains of copyright protection can be seen as analogous to plots of
physical land, so that concepts and customs well established in the
realm of real estate can be applied to them.</p></li>
<li><p>“Imaginary property” is not an ironic term, but a precise one, and as
such it better be used seriously. One implication of this term is, that
just like imaginatively built constructions, creative works must be
considered to be a common cultural heritage of the society with an
associated duty imposed on the owners.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Most ideas presented here are not original and were expressed before by
various people under different circumstances. This essay, therefore,
presents my personal view on the issue, taken as a whole at this time and
date. Just like any other personal opinion, it is merely a residue left
by considerable number of other people words, which I’ve read and heard
over the years passed.</p>
</div></blockquote>
<p>It is quite common, in recent times, to discuss problems arising from
application of copyright in the modern digital environment. However, the
real problem, which is commonly missed, is the obvious lack of duty, which,
necessarily, must be associated with any social right.</p>
<p>The aspect of duty is missed not only in context of copyright discussions.
Indeed, in our overabundant society duties are sometimes forgotten outright.
Yet, they exist and every right has an associated duty, and without such a
balance truly just society simply cannot exist.</p>
<p>The concept above is obvious to the level of triviality when we talk about
“natural” human rights. Since the long forgotten days of king Hammurabi it
is accepted, that person, who denies his fellow human of the right to own
his property or even of his life must be punished, possible by the same
measure. So, the right to live is mandated by the duty to let live everybody
else. I won’t go into the philosophical abyss it is the discussion of basic
human rights and limit myself to accepted practises of property laws. After
all, eager proponents of copyright law tightening prefer to treat copyrighted
items like property, albeit imaginary.</p>
<p>The basic duty associated with the right to own private property is taxation.
It is important to point out that taxation is not some sort of punishment,
inflicted by the society on its members. On a contrary, taxes, at least in
theory, serve as important regulator, aiming to maximise the common good at the
small expense of private discomfort. Simplest example of the kind is dependency
of public road construction funding on fuel tax. If people are willing to spend
more on fuel, social institution in charge of roads gets more money to build
and maintain them. Alternatively, when demand for fuel is low, same institution
can reduce its road maintenance efforts, as they are not really required, and,
consequentially, earns less of the fuel tax money. This is more or less how
social justice is intended to work - in a form of negative feedback dynamic
regulator, allocating resources to where they are really needed.</p>
<p>Of particular interest in the context of imaginary property are issues
of real estate ownership and taxation. For generations, since times immemorial
(in fact, since first tetrapod set foot on the land, as many animals also have
concept of owned territory hardwired into their brains) land was the most
valuable resource people could own. And, in fact, we see that ownership of land
is subject to a considerable number of regulations, most of them existing to
minimise the number of conflicts in the community of neighbours. Landlord can
not perform arbitrary activities with his land without asking permission from
the community, and, more important, the property must be kept in order up to
an acceptable standard, also mandated by the same community. Moreover yet,
landlord is obligated to upheld the right to own his property regularly, by
paying an appropriate tax. Failure to do any of this inevitably results in
legal action and forceful transfer of ownership to other, better suited people.</p>
<p>I suppose, at this point of the essay, anybody will understand where I’m going
to. Yes, I say, if copyrighted work is to be considered a property, let it be
real estate, because the field of human mental enterprise and its fruit are
much closer to a real, dirt covered field and juicy fruits it bears than to a
discardable pair of socks. I will return to this aspect further down the text,
but in the meantime, I shall address the issue of duty, associated with the
(copy)right.</p>
<p>But first, a short introduction to a basic nature of information is necessary.
People, whose occupation is not directly bordering the field of modern
communication theory, often assume information to be a sort of ephemeral, yet
readily available thing, not subject to the forces of nature, nor exposed
to the mercy of elements. The actual state of affairs is, of course, very far
from this.</p>
<p>A direct consequence of one of the most basic laws of creation, so called
<a class="reference external" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noisy-channel_coding_theorem">Noisy channel coding theorem</a>
precludes transmission of arbitrary amounts of information through space or
time. The more information we want to transmit over the vastness of spatial or
temporal spaces, the more effort we need to put in to keep it error free.
Ancient clay tablets or parchment scrolls took enormous amount of manual labour
(energy) to create, yet contained only a few thousand bits of information at
best. This is the primary reason, why we can still read many of them after the
numerous millennia had passed: energy, expended to encode each byte of useful
information was so high, that this information managed to survive the long
journey through time. Since then, we invented overwhelmingly more advanced ways
to encode information, but basic principle stays the same. Moreover, whatever
efficiency gain was obtained by improved encoding techniques, it is negated by
the explosive? exponential growth in the amount of information worth to
preserve.</p>
<p>Lets consider some modern examples. Printed books, for instance, can survive for
decades, even for centuries, but only with appropriate care. They must be
handled carefully, stored in dry environment and far from any insects or rodents
who may want to contribute to ultimate success of the Second Law of
Thermodynamics. Effective retrieval of information from printed books requires
even more work, as any educated librarian would testify.</p>
<p>Yet, since the invention of printing, the situation got even worse. Next
important invention in the field of information storage, photographic film,
requires even more skill, equipment and effort to remain in good health, while
being capable of surviving for even less time. Considerable amounts of cinematic
film stock was already irreversibly lost, and this is only over a historically
minuscule time frame of a single century. There’s nothing mysterious about this
unfortunate fact: colour film stock contains incredible amount of information
and, therefore, mandates expedition of great effort to be able to survive the
journey through the waves of time. There’s no need to emphasise the enormous
cultural importance, old films and books bear, as society without memory has
no better chance of survival then unfortunate Alzheimer’s disease patient.</p>
<p>“Digital revolution” in information storage brought in an additional factor
to consider. Median lifespan of most digital storage media probably does not
exceeds 10 years. In addition to this short physical lifespan (determined by
very high storage densities) digital media is subject to cultural degradation.
Equipment, necessary to recover information from high density storage quickly
becomes obsolete and data formats used – obscure. Even the best wishing and
properly motivated individual may be unable to retrieve useful data from old
digital media, simply due to absence of appropriate equipment or instructions
on how to make some.</p>
<p>Some will argue, that wisdom of the masses may take care of the problem. This
is, unfortunately, not true. Masses, which we take to represent common, not
specifically motivated members of the community, are not prepared, quite
justly, to expend a considerable effort needed to preserve even small amount
of creative work items in a proper order. Even if we look at specifically
organised, non-profit organisations they, more often than not, lack funds,
equipment and payed-for specialist time to restore and maintain even small
amount of old creative works, especially, if non-digital mediums are involved.</p>
<p>The argument above leads us to a very specific conclusion: commercial
exploitation of copyrighted creative work must be allowed and regulated, for
the sake of mere continuous preservation of the works in question. However,
this exploitation must be regulated, in a way analogous to a system, set up for
owners of heritage listed real estate properties. This is to be done for the
greater good of society in general.</p>
<section id="properties-possessed-by-imaginary-property-items">
<h2>Properties possessed by imaginary property items<a class="headerlink" href="#properties-possessed-by-imaginary-property-items" title="Permalink to this heading">¶</a></h2>
<p>Value, contained by the imaginary property item resides purely within
information domain. Vast majority of newly created works comes into existence
as purely digital compositions, represented as a stream of bits. For the smaller
percentage of existing and future non-digital works we have the capability to
create an unambiguous digital representation which will sufficient to identify
and, in many cases, even recreate the work in question.</p>
<p>Thus, we can postulate the following basic property of the creative work: it
can always be represented as a stream of bits, either equivalent or one-to-one
mappable to the work itself. <a class="reference external" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptographic_hash">Cryptographic hash</a>
of this bit stream, accompanied by some additional description can serve as a
compact identifying token for purposes of creative work registration and
tracking.</p>
<p>Given this construct, we can understand, that various forms of the mentally
“same” creative work, are, in fact, different, though derived, copyright items.
This is a desirable property, which is being actively neglected at present.
Books, musical compositions or films are seen as singular copyrighted items no
matter how they are actually encoded, which, in many cases causes troubles and
confusion on behalf of copyright owner.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, it’s very hard, if not outright impossible, to quantify the
notion of “derived” work in general case. The issue of derivation must be judged
by committee of humans on a case by case basis, but, fortunately, only if some
form of conflict arises. However, derivation by means of encoding method is
clearly defined and should be registered explicitly by the owner. Such
specifically derived works will have varying quality and, consequentially,
varying commercial and taxable value (as explained below). Owners will also be
able to allow easier or free access to lower quality variants of their owned
works without the risk of compromising their rights over higher quality, more
valuable variants.</p>
<p>In case, creative work exploitation conflict occurs, the value of the
infringing item must be evaluated in respect to the set of items, registered
by the owner as originating from the same mental source. This is absolutely
necessary in order to establish fairness, as only fair societies can aim for
real prosperity.</p>
</section>
<section id="rights-worthy-of-granting-to-copyright-owners">
<h2>Rights, worthy of granting to copyright owners<a class="headerlink" href="#rights-worthy-of-granting-to-copyright-owners" title="Permalink to this heading">¶</a></h2>
<ol class="arabic">
<li><p>Newly created imaginary property items should be subject to the same
self-claimed copyright rules we have at present. The duration of this
initial period must be specifically limited to some reasonable, short
period of time, lets say 10 years.</p>
<blockquote>
<div><p>If we compare the vast area of human creativity to a sort of newly
discovered Terra Incognita, we can allow for a sort of creativity
“land rush”, as actually happened during European colonisation of the New
World. Everybody shall be allowed to come and grab their own plot of
imaginary property, claiming it for themselves without too much hassle.</p>
</div></blockquote>
</li>
<li><p>During the initial self-assigned copyright term, all creative works of
persisting value must be registered by the appropriate authority. Expected
commercial value of such items must be declared as well, for the sake of
duty imposition, as outlined in the following section.</p>
<blockquote>
<div><p>All historic “land rushes” ended precisely like this. Owners of claimed
land were required to register their possessions with the governing
authority. The establishment of this practise should not add too much
worries to prospective owners. After all, large copyright owning
organisations already perform complicated manipulations with creative
works in their possession, for regulatory rating and profit reasons. Small,
private owners are not expected to own too many commercially exploitable
works, so the effort spent on maintaining registration should not be
excessive.</p>
<p>Such Copyright Authority should not aim to receive the copies of the works,
just like Land Authority does not pretend to control privately owned land.
Rather, it should rely on compact cryptographic constructs representing
proof of authenticity in case conflicts will arise.</p>
</div></blockquote>
</li>
<li><p>There is no need to artificially limit the duration of registered copyright,
given that copyrighted work is beneficial (taxed) and accessible to the whole
society (as outlined below).</p>
<blockquote>
<div><p>After all, we consider this approach to work well enough when it comes to
real estate ownership. Consequentially, it can be applied to imaginary
property as well.</p>
</div></blockquote>
</li>
<li><p>Prospective copyright owners may be allowed to claim rights over existing
creative work, if they can prove their involvement in the creation of the
work in question and are willing to compensate the society appropriately
(from the taxation and access standpoint).</p>
<blockquote>
<div><p>It seems beneficial to allow people to take ownership over works, which
otherwise will be considered “orphaned”, so that those works will not
deteriorate into oblivion.</p>
</div></blockquote>
</li>
<li><p>Owner of the registered imaginary property should be allowed to give up a
responsibility on it. Rather than allowing the works to slip into an unclear
realm of “public domain” it seems beneficial to set up special, non-profit
organisations, which would act as non-exclusive owners of abandoned works.</p>
<blockquote>
<div><p>Society should encourage creation of special, non-profit organisations to
serve as right-holders for copyrighted work passing into public domain
through non-registration or non-payment of taxes (either declared or
malicious). Such organisations can also act to discover and reintroduce
orphaned or forgotten creative works, which has no apparent copyright
holder. Currently such works are essentially removed from circulation and
productive use due to unclear legal status. Proposed system may contain
provisions for re-assumption of lost copyright as stated by the rule above.</p>
</div></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>
</section>
<section id="duties-copyright-owners-should-be-subject-to-in-return-for-rights-granted">
<h2>Duties, copyright owners should be subject to in return for rights granted<a class="headerlink" href="#duties-copyright-owners-should-be-subject-to-in-return-for-rights-granted" title="Permalink to this heading">¶</a></h2>
<ol class="arabic">
<li><p>All registered copyrighted items shall be subject to a proportional tax.
The value and the expected income generated by the item should be declared
in advance by the owner, and can be adjusted on annual basis. Zero valued
items registered by for-profit organisations or individuals should be taxed
at some small rate as well, in order to discourage mindless accumulation of
dormant copyrighted works, which quite often happens nowadays.</p>
<blockquote>
<div><p>Generally speaking, indirect taxation of profit generating creative work
happens already, by means of income or corporate taxes. It seems beneficial
to separate imaginary property tax into a distinctive category (similar
to real estate taxes) for a more careful accounting of the non-producing
sector of the industry. The implementation of this rule should
not be too problematic, as most serious copyright owners (such as book
publishers or film makers) already do their accounting by work item (for
process and profit optimisation purposes).</p>
</div></blockquote>
</li>
<li><p>Owners must allow consumers (in a broad sense of the word) access to the
registered copyrighted work under customary and acceptable terms pertaining
the type of work in question. This particular rule must be enforced with
fines or denial of copyright ownership of the title.</p>
<blockquote>
<div><p>While this rule may sound somewhat controversial, it is the only way to
ensure that owner takes care of the copyrighted work. Acceptable licensing
terms can be calculated on the basis of item’s tax value, which is
necessary to satisfy the rule above. For example, licensing cost for the
master copy of the popular feature film or source code of the popular
application may be declared to worth many million dollars, but these items
will get taxed appropriately in return. On the other hand, compressed
version of the same movie or a binary application build will bear much
lesser licensing price and correspondingly lower tax obligations.</p>
<p>The fairness of this rule is well entrenched in real estate area.
Neighbourhoods, in general, do not allow private owners to build
excessively high fences, paint heritage properties in shiny colours or
prevent people from using the adjacent sidewalks. Same concept should be
valid in imaginary property realm.</p>
</div></blockquote>
</li>
</ol>
</section>
<section id="what-problems-should-proposed-copyright-system-really-address">
<h2>What problems should proposed copyright system really address?<a class="headerlink" href="#what-problems-should-proposed-copyright-system-really-address" title="Permalink to this heading">¶</a></h2>
<p>To conclude, I would like to summarise the problems which are expected
to be dealt by the proposed system. It so happens, that publishers of creative
works, acting in their interest, maintain in good order only certain popular
subset of the creative works in their possession. They even act to provide
access to those under a relatively reasonable terms, as dictated by many
socioeconomic factors. However, contemporary laws encourage accumulation of
copyrighted work titles in the hands of major owners, who do not have any
interest in maintaining or distributing these works of lower potential value.
The work may even perish outright without its owner even noticing, causing harm
to the collective memory of humankind.</p>
<p>“Orphaned works” present additional major problem. Currently, there is no way
to make use of such works, which are believed to be under valid copyright, yet
the owner can not be established or located. In the real estate practise,
property which had fallen into disrepair and has a large unpaid tax debt on it
is appropriated by the society with an intend to find a better caretaker
(either private person willing to pay the debts or community manager). There
is no reason why same practise can not be applied to imaginary property as
well.</p>
<p>While it may appear that copyright is some sort of luxury, relevant only in
well-fed society of prosperity and abundance, it is, in fact, a major mechanism
regulating the collective memory of the society (as already mentioned above).
Human civilisation had already matured to a stage, whereupon it must start to
utilise the collective intelligence or give up technological progress outright.
Therefore, issues of collective thought management must be brought to the
forefront of public discussion and dealt with actively, despite the giant
obstacles imposed by ignorance and greed.</p>
<p><a class="reference external" href="http://github.com/oakad/oakad.github.com/issues#issue/1">General comments, corrections, objections?</a></p>
</section>
</section>
<div class="clearer"></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="sphinxsidebar" role="navigation" aria-label="main navigation">
<div class="sphinxsidebarwrapper">
<div>
<h3><a href="index.html">Table of Contents</a></h3>
<ul>
<li><a class="reference internal" href="#">Treatise on copyright and preservation of information</a><ul>
<li><a class="reference internal" href="#properties-possessed-by-imaginary-property-items">Properties possessed by imaginary property items</a></li>
<li><a class="reference internal" href="#rights-worthy-of-granting-to-copyright-owners">Rights, worthy of granting to copyright owners</a></li>
<li><a class="reference internal" href="#duties-copyright-owners-should-be-subject-to-in-return-for-rights-granted">Duties, copyright owners should be subject to in return for rights granted</a></li>
<li><a class="reference internal" href="#what-problems-should-proposed-copyright-system-really-address">What problems should proposed copyright system really address?</a></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div role="note" aria-label="source link">
<h3>This Page</h3>
<ul class="this-page-menu">
<li><a href="_sources/cright.rst.txt"
rel="nofollow">Show Source</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
<div id="searchbox" style="display: none" role="search">
<h3 id="searchlabel">Quick search</h3>
<div class="searchformwrapper">
<form class="search" action="search.html" method="get">
<input type="text" name="q" aria-labelledby="searchlabel" autocomplete="off" autocorrect="off" autocapitalize="off" spellcheck="false"/>
<input type="submit" value="Go" />
</form>
</div>
</div>
<script>document.getElementById('searchbox').style.display = "block"</script>
</div>
</div>
<div class="clearer"></div>
</div>
<div class="related" role="navigation" aria-label="related navigation">
<h3>Navigation</h3>
<ul>
<li class="right" style="margin-right: 10px">
<a href="genindex.html" title="General Index"
>index</a></li>
<li class="nav-item nav-item-0"><a href="index.html">Nothing special</a> »</li>
<li class="nav-item nav-item-this"><a href="">Treatise on copyright and preservation of information</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="footer" role="contentinfo">
© <a href="copyright.html">Copyright</a> 2010 - 2023, Alex Dubov <[email protected]>.
Created using <a href="https://www.sphinx-doc.org/">Sphinx</a> 6.1.3.
</div>
</body>
</html>