I'm really conflicted about this. I'm firmly in the camp of "reject this submission" for two reasons:
> 1. I don't want something to jeopardize the future of HPR 2. I don't want to put undue work or stress on Ken--he does so much for the community already However, I'm very upset that I can't think of a better solution. The current climate of copyright litigation has a tremendously chilling effect on free speech. I absolutely believe that content creators who wish to profit from their work should have the ability to do so. But it's also essential that the public be allowed to criticize it--including parody and reasonable except. We're caught in the middle, having to choose between censorship and risking everything the community has built. I wish there were a better option, but I think we have to reject the show. Hopefully the host would be willing to resubmit the show including his commentary about the works but omitting the excerpts (perhaps linking to them). -laindir
_______________________________________________ Hpr mailing list [email protected] http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org
