[A2k] Compilation for Paris Accord?

[Manon Ress]

Ludovic,

merci pour la note et les bonnes idees.

Pour l'instant nous reunissons les propositions et les commentaires
sur cette page:
http://www.cptech.org/a2k/parisaccord.html

Je suis tout a fait d'accord sur le jargon d'experts que nous devons
essayer d'eviter le plus possible.  Et il faut se souvenir que la
liste comprend des non-experts en politiques des logiciels ou des
medicaments par exemple.  Enfin, il y aura bien des interpretes pour
le meeting a Paris mais en attendant, sur la liste, nous ne sommes
pas tous parfaitement anglophones.

Ludovic,
thanks for the email and the good suggestions

For now we're compiling the proposals and comments at:
http://www.cptech.org/a2k/parisaccord.html

I agree strongly about the jargon that we should avoid as much as
possible.  We should  remember that not everyone on the list is an
expert in software or medicines etc..  And while there will be
interpretations at the Paris meeting, not everyone on the list is
English speaking like a native.

A bientot ;)

Manon





On Jun 6, 2006, at 4:46 PM, Ludovic Penet wrote:

> Le mardi 06 juin 2006 =E0 15:07 +0100, Nick Ashton-Hart a =E9crit :
>> Philippe, many thanks for the kind words :)
>>
>> As regards the below, I have some questions and points:
>>
>> Most broadly, I have very deliberately referred almost entirely to
>> RMI and TPMs, and not DRMs for a very specific reason:
> Is there a consolidated of the project of accord available somewhere ?
> It would be quite useful to put it on a wiki, even a private one,
> as it
> can be hard to follow all of the interesting discussion that take
> place
> on this list.
>
> What is the target audience of this accord ? What I have read since I
> subscribed to this mailing list is very interesting, but I fear that
> journalists will have lots of difficulties to understand its
> subtleties.
>
> I often had to explain journalists the meaning of the debates on the
> French copyright law these last months. Even the best of them, and
> excepted those who are already convinced by what we promote, have lots
> of difficulties to understand the subtleties and even more
> difficulties
> to translate them in simple words for people having other center of
> interests. Explaining people who do not know what interoperability
> means
> what was important in article 7 of DADVSI at 4am was a very
> interesting
> experience.
>
> So, I think that it would be good to forget all those cryptic acronyms
> and get back to simple principles such as =AB Technology should be used
> only to get an estimation of the number of downloads of music. It
> should
> not control the use of files, especially in the private space. =BB
>
> In fact, I almost stopped talking about interoperability - most
> non-specialists were falling asleep after hearing this strange new
> word.
> I try to stick to non-technical words, such as neutrality, and to
> define
> them with the most simple words - I do not claim I always succeed. ;-)
>
> At least, proposing a very simple text in addition to the full version
> would be very useful.
>
> Sorry for this short interruption in your work. :-)
>
> Ludovic
>
>

************************************************
Manon Anne Ress
manon.ress@cptech.org,
www.cptech.org

Consumer Project on Technology
1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20009 USA
Tel.:  +1.202.332.2670, Ext 16 Fax: +1.202.332.2673

Consumer Project on Technology
1 Route des  Morillons, CP 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 791 6727

Consumer Project on Technology
24 Highbury Crescent, London, N5 1RX, UK
Tel: +44(0)207 226 6663 ex 252 Fax: +44(0)207 354 0607