Ahoy, Rick and David brought up some broad issues to do with our strategy, and by "our" I mean FC-UK collectively and as individuals. In this reply I've tried to concisely express my thoughts on this, since I don't have the time right now to throw myself into a huge email debate ;-)
Note that I'm not dismissing outright any views here, instead I mean to prioritise and filter to show why I put my energies where I do. On Wednesday 06 September 2006 19:38, David Berry wrote: > People don't care about Free Culture because currently it is only in > their peripheral vision. It is when their friends, children, parents > and colleagues start being arrested, hassled, monitored and excluded > that it will rise up the public consciousness. This view, which I shall call the Domesday Cheerleader, is one that is raised once in a while. I think it's very unlikely that we'd ever see such an extreme situation in the UK, that is sufficiently extreme for the general public to really feel repressed. It's not in the commercial interests of the mega corps to go this far, and there are just enough regulatory bodies about to rein them in. Conclusion: we are very unlikely to have a broad-based grassroots movement that reacts against repressive use of copyright and related laws/technologies. > The Remix things are a good idea, but they are too localised to have > much *political* effect (although they can be very culturally eye- > opening for the public) Remix Reading does a number of things that have an impact far beyond a cultural spectacle: * direct education about copyright/copyleft, largely through discussions * a renewal of community and communal arts activity * cultural production that acts as a practical counterweight to 'the industry' * an exploration of what copyleft actually means in practice Of course Remix Reading hasn't singlehandedly changed the EU's Lisbon Agenda such that copyleft and the intellectual commons sit at the heart of international politics. But the political impact of the project is (potentially) immense, both at a local and higher (UK) level. In the first place, people involved with the project are directly politicised, and (re)engage with the issues. By becoming involved with an arts community, re-thinking cultural policy and exploring all kinds of social practices, they are given a platform to become better citizens. Once they reach this state, they are far more likely to support the kinds of organisations (like ORG and FC-UK) that work on a higher level. There is a preponderance of programmers in digital rights activism principally because they have been confronted with the politics for years, and they have probably practiced or observed the alternative - free software. Second, when talking to MPs and their assistants in Reading, and to industry/policy wonks at research seminars, I found it very difficult to persuade them that anybody really cared about the issues I raised. Maybe we really are a tiny bunch of nutters, maybe most people when asked would prefer full copyright! Being able to discuss a practical example, and I hope one day a network of examples, is of significant value to people working on a higher level. Finally, the project has been of value to myself and (based on feedback) many others who identify with the "free culture movement", in better understanding the theory and practice of copyleft. It's one among many experiences and talking points that have enhanced an often overly theoretical discussion. I'll pick up on all of this in a moment... > But perhaps far more important than anything else, Free Culture needs > an economic base, it is nothing without money and it needs an income > urgently in order to be active Now, having been involved in the FFII effort lobbying against software patents, I'm well aware of the political impact that we can have. But in that case we were working on an issue that drew significant support from tens of thousands of free software programmers and businesses. That meant masses of volunteer time, money and a much more weighty argument to take to politicians. FC-UK doesn't have any of that right now. David has raised the idea of getting full time staff several times, and if somebody could make that happen I'm sure nobody would complain :o) As things stand I haven't got the skills, the contacts nor the time to make it happen. ORG has probably drained a lot of grassroots financial support, and I can't see any obvious routes through funding bodies. Given that reality, I look at the resources I have (skills, energy, time, contacts) and ask how I can make the greatest difference. Over the years I've consistently arrived at the same answer: run a project that makes a limited but significant impact on my local community, and that has much wider and very significant resonance both for politicians and the free culture movement. Then stay involved with national and international organisations, write critiques and commentaries, and try to have as much fun as possible along the way! For me that has been, and remains, a far more effective strategy than sitting on my hands waiting for an economic base to appear. > But where is Free Culture? It still has barely got an identity, let > alone any members, and still falls prey to the ideology of the > network.. This I have to say is libertarian nonsense and iCommons is > the pinnacle of the nonsense (nonsense on stilts?). Constructive engagement is, currently, a *much* better option for us than flippant comments like that. iCommons is a baby organisation that remains very open to change, and as-yet unbeholden to the "network ideology" types that David mentions. If everyone in FC-UK engaged with it then it could become a very interesting and worthwhile organisation. > after all the debates we have had > over the past few years FC has not contributed very much at all, > still dispersed, still too many people believing atoms are stronger > than movements and solidarity... and still an email list, a website > and a few letters to the local newspaper or MP. That's a very downhearted and negative appraisal, which isn't exactly very fair on the people in FC-UK who do work hard in their rare moments of free time :-( Here are achievements I think we can be proud of, in no particular order... please excuse me if I've missed you out in this hastily assembled list: * The slowly-developing Public Domain Burn project, which now partly works. We're developing links with other organisations around the world doing similar projects. * DeptfordTV and their fantastic local documentation project * Remix Reading, which is soon to change to RAVE and transform into a really amazing free culture social enterprise * LOCA Records, which so far as I know is still trundling along (David?) * Fading Ways UK and Magnatune, which both have UK branches, are in touch / involved with FC-UK are sort-of-free :) * The gentle lobbying over the Creative Archive, which has prompted several interesting responses and changes in direction for the better * Remix Leeds' flickr project, exposing lots of photographers to free culture * Individually, our many inputs into CC/iCommons policy that have happened as a result of, or been informed by, discussions within FC-UK * Ever-stronger links internationally, for me especially since the iCommons summit in Rio I'd say those are significant contributions, given our resources and opportunities. There are many tools to use in developing a good campaigning strategy, but I have two favourites. The first is to draw a two-dimensional chart (called forcefield analysis). On the x-axis plot "how friendly are they?", with very friendly people on the right of the axis. On the y-axis plot "how hard are they to move?", with tough nuts at the top. Then start plotting players (e.g. CC, the RIAA, my local MP, etc.) on the chart. Once you have a good selection, start asking: how can I move enough people towards the right of the chart to make a difference? The second is useful once you've decided an overall aim (like "stop the copyright extensions"). Devise various tactics (hopefully informed by the first tool) and then stick them in a table with four columns: strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT analysis). Analyse each tactic in terms of these attributes. I'd thoroughly recommend people using tools like those, they really help me think about my activities more carefully: http://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/free/strat Kind regards, Tom -- The task of critique is not to denounce the ideals, but to show their transformation into ideologies, and to challenge the ideology in the name of the betrayed ideal (Fromm – Beyond The Chains Of Illusion) _______________________________________________ fc-uk-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/fc-uk-discuss
