Wait, who said what about civil disobedience? And until people start getting arrested, I don't think we're there yet.
On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 12:18 AM, Nelson Pavlosky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > There are definitely situations in which civil disobedience could be > justified and even required, although such situations are much less > common in the field of free culture than in the field of, say, civil > rights. > > The event that lead directly to the founding of SFC, the Diebold case, > included a civil disobedience component, although it was not one that > Luke and I directly participated in. There were these memos that > detailed possible problems with the voting machines which are the > backbone of our democracy, and Diebold was trying to suppress that > information. Luke and I took the legal route, fighting it in the > courts, but our allies didn't want to count on the courts making the > right call when democracy itself was on the line: they wanted to make > sure the public got the information it needed one way or the other. > They organized a system of mirrors on college campuses, including people > like Asheesh Laroia and many of our earliest SFC recruits, to make sure > the Diebold memos stayed available. Diebold had to play whack-a-mole, > sending takedown notices to each campus, but once the mirrors on one > campus were shut down, the memos just popped up on another campus. > > It actually turned out that the court agreed with us that hosting the > Diebold memos was legal and a fair use. Therefore the "electronic civil > disobedience" campaign had been arguably legal the whole time, and not > actually civil disobedience. However, if the court had ruled the other > way, the mirrors would have continued to host the Diebold memos and > ensure public knowledge of possible flaws with our elections, even if it > had been judged to be against the law. And I would have supported them > in that action 100%, even if I were unable to participate myself due to > legal reasons (I would have wanted to keep my hands "clean" during the > appeals process, presumably). Sometimes the law is wrong, and when the > stakes are high enough, it is best to break the law, accepting the legal > consequences for your actions. > > I am not saying that SFC should necessarily ever officially organize a > campaign involving civil disobedience. That's a question for the > lawyers, as to what is legally possible or what is legally most > damaging, and an ethical question of whether it would be better to let > the organization shoulder the consequences for a civil disobedience > action, or to let the individuals hang separately. However, I can > easily imagine another situation where civil disobedience would be > justified and necessary, just like the Diebold case if the court had > ruled the other way, and it would be a discussion worth having as to > what SFC's responsibilities are given our mission, our resources and our > constituents, and whether SFC should knowingly break an unjust law. > > Peace, > ~Nelson Pavlosky~ > > Clifford Conley Owens III wrote: > > I hear a lot of people in this organization speak very highly of civil > > disobedience, and it seems like some of us are just waiting for an > > opportunity to justify breaking the law and sticking it to "the man." I > > suppose I could right a very long-winded article on why I think civil > > disobedience is a bad idea, but I'm not much of a writer, so I'll just > > say a few things that come to mind. > > > > One example that often comes up is piracy, but I feel that that helps > > out the mpaa/riaa far more than just boycotting it all together. I > > suppose most of you don't know this, but I used to be on the far other > > side of this discussion (about copyright/culture). I remember arguing > > about copyright and piracy with someone in a philosophy class in high > > school (and imagine me talking like a 16-year-old version of Dan > > Glickman). I thought that everyone who disagreed with me was being > > immature. How ironic that over four years later I became a grad student > > and the person I was arguing with was one of my first chapter members. > > But the thing is, I *still* think that all the people in the room who > > disagreed were being immature! It wasn't until I discovered > > *constructive* solutions like the FSF and CC that I really changed my > > mind about things. > > > > I'm open for discussion, but if this organization ever plans a civil > > disobedience event, you can count me out of the event, and possibly out > > of the organization. > > > > ~Conley > > _______________________________________________ > > Discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
