Re: RE: If I were to talk with Disney's IP lobbyists

[ Home ][ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]
Brewster Kahle
Wed, 18 Mar 1998 20:10:57 -0800


Yes, there are tradeoffs between property owners and the public sphere.
These are classic and ancient: individual interests vs society's interests.
I believe there is a roll for civic spaces in the digital world, where the
good is preserved even if the author disappears. Further, these works can
be used for research on other subjects. Such are the roles of libraries
and archives. We are trying to understand what a "digital" library is, and
this is our shot at it: a collection of publicly available writings,
organized, cataloged, and usable by everyone. We stop short of being an
easy place to get the original works so as to not interfere with the
publishing model of the original publisher. We also stop short of forcing
anyone: we will not collect and retroactively remove anything a website
owner wishes.

As your objections in the 2nd paragraph illustrate, it is not clear that
everyone agrees.

-brewster

At 12:08 PM 3/2/98 -0500, James Gleick wrote:
>
>
>On Sunday, March 01, 1998 1:01 PM, Brewster Kahle [SMTP:]
>wrote:
>>
>> * treat nonprint products like print publications in terms of roles
>> libraries and archives: use copyright law, perserve fair use, allowance
>to
>
>Not quite possible, unfortunately. Where libraries are concerned, a
>delicate balance was maintained in the era of printed books. If a library
>bought one copy of a book, only one person at a time (approximately) could
>borrow it, and the process was slow. Maybe tens of people per year. A
>digital library or archive that could lend one of my books to millions of
>people daily would upset the balance, to put it mildly. It would have
>become a publisher. You might as well just say that authors should not be
>compensated for their work.
>
>I don't even think it's clear that you should be archiving copyrighted
>material. Let's say I make some articles available on my Web site but wish
>to maintain my ownership and control of the copyright. Shouldn't I be able
>to edit, correct, and even withdraw an article from free circulation? I
>might not be comfortable with your copying and in effect publishing such
>texts.
>
>James Gleick
>http://www.around.com
>
>