[A2k] Users' rights

Sat Jun 27 11:02:01 2009

Janice:

I am a bit suprised by your message.

I don't understand how we can consider that the word "user" has the implica=
tion of being what you call "parasitical", that it means they "use other pe=
ople."  For example, to call someone a "library user" has no implication, a=
t least to me, that this person is a parasite. Or that a "computer user" is=
 somehow "using other people."

I am working from the Oxford English Dictionary definition of the word "use=
r"
"1. a. One who has or makes use of a thing; one who uses or employs anythin=
g."

As for your idea that the copyright system is based on the notion of "balan=
ce" ....well, we will have to leave the use of this term and its ideologica=
l implications for another day. For now, perhaps you might be interested in=
 reading pages 785-793 (International  Copyright: An Unbalanced and "Unbala=
nceable" System ) in my "Burn Berne" article that can be found at:

http://www.houstonlawreview.org/archive/downloads/40-3_pdf/storyg3r.pdf

Alan Story

PS:
And this is very much a PS. I agree that the word "user" CAN also be employ=
ed in a colloquial way. To quote again from the OED, but very far down in t=
he list of definitions, we find:

d. One who manipulates others for personal advantage. colloq. (orig. N. Ame=
r.).
1982 M. ATWOOD Bodily Harm V. 247 He's a politician so he's a user. 1984 E.=
 JONG Parachutes & Kisses xix. 328 He was another Josh Ace (sweet-seeming y=
ounger man with the soul of a user). 1988 A. MACRAE Awful Childhoods xi. 12=
9 What a user!.. And he never contributed a thing to the meal.

But I am not personally too troubled by this. Many words have more than one=
 meaning and if libraries and computers can have "users",  why cannot peopl=
e who read copyrighted (or non-copyrighted)  books or listen to and/or work=
 with music also be called "users"?

Alan Story
Senior Lecturer, Intellectual Property Law
Kent Law School
University of Kent
Canterbury Kent
United Kingdom      CT2 7NS
acs3@kent.ac.uk
Phone: +44 (0)1227 823316
________________________________________
From: Janice Pilch [pilch@illinois.edu]
Sent: 27 June 2009 02:37
To: James Love; A.C.Story
Cc: a2k@lists.essential.org
Subject: Re: [A2k] Users' rights

Users=92 rights is the right concept, but I think it=92s slightly off. We c=
all someone a user when they are parasitical, when they use other people. W=
ould something like =93public rights=94 be better? Limitations and exceptio=
ns maintaining the longstanding function of copyright law in society should=
 be viewed as public rights, balancing the private rights to information al=
so granted in copyright laws.

Janice Pilch

---- Original message ----
>Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:31:35 -0400
>From: James Love <james.love@keionline.org>
>Subject: Re: [A2k] Users' rights
>To: "A.C.Story" <A.C.Story@kent.ac.uk>
>Cc: "a2k@lists.essential.org" <a2k@lists.essential.org>
>
>I like users rights.
>
>For plant varieties protection, there is something called farmers
>rights... http://www.farmersrights.org/
>
>On Fri, 2009-06-26 at 18:44 +0100, A.C.Story wrote:
>> For several years and again in the last few days, this list has been deb=
ating whether the words ----dare I say them? ---- =93intellectual property=
=94 should ever be used and the political consequences of doing so. Could I=
 suggest that we should just agree to disagree and move on=85.
>>
>> Meanwhile, there seems to be no thought given at all to the consequences=
 of endlessly repeating the words: " copyright limitations and exceptions."=
 This phrase is freighted with a political/legal meaning, namely that copyr=
ight restrictions and the monopoly position of copyright owner are the norm=
al and natural state of the world. And further, that everything else, such =
as the right to use a copyrighted work, is a mere table-scrap or an oddity,=
 that is, an exception to the way the world of copyright should work. Is it=
 any surprise then that =93limitations and exceptions=94 is the phrase of c=
hoice exclusively used by WIPO officials and most copyright owners?
>>
>> Why don=92t we instead use the words =93users=92 rights=94? This phrase =
communicates the fact that the rights which users have are rights created o=
r granted by the state ---- just as copyright is a state-created right, by =
the way
>> ---- and that they are not a favour granted by copyright lords for use b=
y us copyright =93peasants.=94
>>
>> Mind you, I see it as rather beside the point to tirelessly challenge ev=
ery person on this list who uses the phrase =93limitations and exceptions=
=94. It might be productive, however, if WIPO spokespersons and other copyr=
ight fundamentalists were occasionally challenged on their wording of choic=
e and phrase =93users=92 rights=94 was employed instead. I saw this done on=
ce, and boy, did the veils drop away quickly and the real political stakes =
come to the surface.
>>
>> It is very difficult to take apart the lord=92s copyright manor if we ke=
ep using the lord=92s words.
>>
>> Best
>> Alan Story
>>
>> Alan Story
>> Senior Lecturer, Intellectual Property Law
>> Kent Law School
>> University of Kent
>> Canterbury Kent
>> United Kingdom      CT2 7NS
>> acs3@kent.ac.uk
>> _______________________________________________
>> A2k mailing list
>> A2k@lists.essential.org
>> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k
>
>--
>James Love, Director, Knowledge Ecology International
>http://www.keionline.org | mailto:james.love at keionline.org
>Wk: +1.202.332.2671 | US Mobile +1.202.361.3040 | Geneva Mobile +41.76.413=
.6584
>
>_______________________________________________
>A2k mailing list
>A2k@lists.essential.org
>http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k
----------------------------------------
Janice T. Pilch
Associate Professor of Library Administration
Modern Languages and Linguistics Library
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
1408 W. Gregory Drive, Urbana, IL 61801
Tel (217) 244-9399
Fax (217) 333-2214