[Upd-discuss] a longer term strategy for promoting the public domain?

[sandor]

Richard Stallman wrote:

>	Bringing attention to issues is worthwhile - but intrinsic to this 
>    is being responsive as opposed to becoming an impetus - and we can not 
>    afford a campaign of attrition (we will [lose])... As well, such a course 
>    of action faces the (very great) momentum of existing forces head-on... 
>
>"Attrition" does not fit the situation, since our statements will not
>make the publisher's PR people disappear, any more than their
>statements will do so to us.  "Momentum" is not quite an accurate
>analogy either.  Challenging their views head-on is exactly what we
>must do, if we are to give the existing sentiment of P2P users a
>nucleus to form up as an ethical opposition to the power that the
>publishers demand.
>  
>
    I apologize for my lack of clarity as I agree completely with your 
sentiment. My point being that addressing "views" could be more 
productive than bringing attention to a legal issue. I was referencing 
actions which seem to be responses to attacks on the public domain. As 
long as we are responsive and not proactive I believe it is certainly a 
battle of "attrition" ( A gradual, natural reduction in membership or 
personnel, as through retirement, resignation, or death.) - in so much 
as, we are waiting for natural forces to do our work for us...
    I do not mean that bringing such issues to light, or engaging in 
protecting those freedoms we value in a legal setting is a poor thing 
(or should not be engaged in by the UPD) - I simply mean that addressing 
public opinion could be a more efficient use of UPD resources.
    When I speak of momentum, I am referring to the socio-economic 
resources (money, public understanding) that have built in favor of 
those favoring the non-public domain. I meant to point-out that arenas 
such as the legal system have been influenced for many years and as such 
are biased against the public domain. I thought perhaps an arena that 
was not so specifically constructed and maintained would afford us a 
better chance for success.
   

>    And I have concerns of mis-framing concepts with the inevitable of use 
>    of  "intellectual property" and other poor constructs.
>
>It's not at all inevitable.  To avoid it, we only need to decide to
>avoid it.
>
    Given my above specification of legal challenges - I have to stand 
by my original statement. I do not believe that it would be possible to 
address the concept of the public domain in a current legal setting in a 
manner that *I* would find correct. I suspect my views of the public 
domain and yours may differ - and this may be why one of us is more at 
ease defining the concept within certain paradigms than the other...

-sándor