John, The minimum is necessary for survival is not sufficient to achieve optimal scenarios.
On Tuesday, June 28, 2016, John Hendrik Weitzmann < [email protected]> wrote: > To the contrary, I think: Wikimedia projects are proof that production of > knowledge is not at all necessarily tied to compensation/remuneration. So, > as much as I am a fan of levies to compensate for (unhindered and > unsurveilled) private reproduction of works in general, I don't see why we > should petition in this way. > > 2016-06-23 16:38 GMT+02:00 James Salsman <[email protected] > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>>: > >> The mass consumer copying which allows widespread sharing of >> knowledge, protographs, performances, written works, etc., also made it >> more difficult for anyone but the most popular artists supported by the >> larger consolidated publishers to remain gainfully employed, cutting the >> total number of people employed as such artists substantially. Wikipedia >> has unresolved plagiarism issues which are part of the same problem, but >> the web in general is designed to make and transmit digital copies of >> things, usually without compensation, so the issue is central to >> sustainable production of knowledge. >> >> >> On Thursday, June 23, 2016, L.Gelauff <[email protected] >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>> wrote: >> >>> At this point I don't see how redistributing copyright income is in >>> scope for Wikimedia. Maybe on a tangent, very remotely? I might be missing >>> something. >>> >>> Best >>> Lodewijk >>> >>> 2016-06-23 16:27 GMT+02:00 James Salsman <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> Lodewijk, >>>> >>>> What is your opinion of this particular proposal? The Copyright Office >>>> said they wanted to study it when I spoke with them yesterday. It seems >>>> clear to me. I did the math after looking at employed artist numbers from >>>> the Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics, and am convinced it >>>> would be near-optimal. >>>> >>>> On Thursday, June 23, 2016, L.Gelauff <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi James, >>>>> >>>>> Given the sensitive nature of the list, and your history in >>>>> discussions, please don't take 'no comment' for 'no objection'. I stopped >>>>> objecting to your emails quite a while ago even if I disagree because they >>>>> are so often far beyond what I consider our shared Wikimedia values, and I >>>>> suspect I might not be the only one. >>>>> >>>>> If you respond, I hope you'll do so as an individual, without >>>>> suggesting you respond on behalf of anything or anyone. But that is >>>>> perhaps >>>>> stating the obvious. >>>>> >>>>> Lodewijk >>>>> >>>>> 2016-06-23 16:15 GMT+02:00 James Salsman <[email protected]>: >>>>> >>>>>> Since there have been no objections, would anyone like to cosponsor >>>>>> this? >>>>>> >>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>>>> From: *Copyright Information* <[email protected]> >>>>>> Date: Thursday, June 23, 2016 >>>>>> Subject: RE: General copyright >>>>>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>>>>> Cc: Copyright Information <[email protected]> >>>>>> >>>>>> You may petition the Copyright Royalty Board by mail: >>>>>> >>>>>> Copyright Royalty Board >>>>>> >>>>>> PO Box 70977 >>>>>> >>>>>> Washington, DC 20024-0400 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sincerely, >>>>>> >>>>>> LG >>>>>> >>>>>> U.S. Copyright Office >>>>>> >>>>>> Attn: Public Information Office >>>>>> >>>>>> 101 Independence Avenue, S.E. >>>>>> >>>>>> Washington, DC 20559-6000 >>>>>> >>>>>> Email: [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>>> Phone: 877-476-0778 (toll free) or 202-707-5959 >>>>>> >>>>>> Fax: 202-252-2041 >>>>>> >>>>>> Website: www.copyright.gov >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] >>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2016 12:50 PM >>>>>> *To:* Copyright Information >>>>>> *Subject:* General copyright >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> General Questions Form >>>>>> >>>>>> Category: General copyright >>>>>> Name: James Salsman >>>>>> Email: [email protected] >>>>>> Question: I would like to petition the Copyright Royalty Judges to >>>>>> institute a sliding scale to redistribute top-40 windfalls from >>>>>> consolidated artists\' publishers to small, developing, and emerging >>>>>> artists in order to support the same number of gainfully employed >>>>>> performing and writing artists prior to the introduction of mass consumer >>>>>> copying technology. What are the email address(es) for petitioning the >>>>>> CRB? >>>>>> Thank you. Sincerely, James Salsman tel.: 650-427-9625 email: >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Publicpolicy mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Publicpolicy mailing list >> [email protected] >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy >> >> > > > -- > Referent für Politik und Recht > Legal and Policy Advisor > > Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin > Tel. +49 (0)30 219 158 26-0 > http://wikimedia.de > > Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen > Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei! > http://spenden.wikimedia.de/ > > Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. > Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter > der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für > Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207. >
_______________________________________________ Publicpolicy mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy
