Assuming my argument below is sufficiently persuasive, is https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=CRB-2016-0002-0002 an appropriate opportunity to ask others to contact the Copyright Royalty Board and ask for a sliding scale redistribution from the top-popularity artists who have financially benefited from mass consumer copying technologies, to greater proportions for new, small, and emerging artists, in order to support pre-mass copying artist employment and demand?
If so, the deadline for comments on those proposed non-changes is August 24. Best regards, Jim Salsman On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 6:35 AM, James Salsman <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry I hit reply early. > > The minimum necessary for production of knowledge is not sufficient to > produce the optimum amount of knowledge. Therefore we should petition to > redistribute compulsory license royalties to make amends for the reasons > that compulsory licenses are awarded, instead of merely awarding the > particular people who prove that they should be awarded. > > > On Thursday, June 30, 2016, James Salsman <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> 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]>: >>>> >>>> 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]> 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] >>>> 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
