Point taken regarding unauthorized copying masquerading as civil disobedience, Conley, but I would caution against throwing out babies with bathwater. Non-violent direct action has been a powerful tactic for many activist organizations and social movements. Properly deployed amid a diversity of approaches, it can be done effectively, respectfully, and responsibly.
Kevin On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Fred Benenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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 > > -- )_)_)_)_)_)_ _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
