cyberlaw.stanford.edu/lessig/blog/archives/2003_06.shtml#001320 -> www.lessig.org/blog/archives/2003_06.shtml
But let's remember this: We're about to see an amazing shift in passion and attention in this Democratic Primary. To those who insist the Internet matters not at all, what explains this? The issue is not how many people you have on your mailing list; Whether or not this is how campaigns should be run, it is exactly how elections should be won. Most of the press has focused on the Michigan affirmative action cases, which were of course important, and rightly decided. But I continue to be struck by the profoundly important decision in the Lawrence case, which found it beyond the government's power to regulate the private, consensual sexual behavior of adults. There will be gaggles of law review articles written about this, and lots of speculation about the continued life of privacy jurisprudence. But I was struck by a more tangible reaction to the decision that says a great deal about how it feels to those it affects. We're living in the Castro in San Francisco while renovations on our house are completed. As anyone who has driven through this neighborhood knows, at Market and Castro there is a huge Gay Pride flag that flies every day of the year. But I am told that the day after Lawrence was decided, the Gay Pride flag came down. It was an extraordinary moment that said more about the importance of this decision than any commentary ever could. We met with the staffs of Senators Cantwell, McCain and Leahy, then met with Congressman Cannon and Boucher. And -- at her request -- we met with Congresswoman Bono. It was a strongly positive meeting with everyone, though of course Congresswoman Bono started most skeptically. By the end, however, she demonstrated a genuine openness to the issue, and a willingness to consider the proposal. But after listening to her talk about both this and the Sonny Bono Act, her motivations seemed quite genuinely to be about securing to artists continued reward from creativity. Not a bad motivation, all things considered, if we can balance it with protection of the public domain. Others began closer to where we were, and so we ended even closer to where we wanted them to be. Congressman Boucher agreed to join as a sponsor -- so at least three good souls in DC. The best part, of course, was Congresswoman Lofgren's press conference, announcing the bill that she and Congressman Doolittle will introduce, and explaining the reasons. She gets it, and she is powerful and right in her explanation. This was a strange day of feeling Congress sometimes somehow might work. It's very early, and we have yet to weather the criticism and opposition. And of course, if money lines on this one, we will not prevail. But every, from Members to staff, took this as seriously as anyone could hope. One point was clear however: The work of the petition was extremely important. At least one Member indicated to me that he/she had been made aware of this issue by someone signing the petition. Another member indicated they had heard from people who had signed the petition. The more of this we can build, the more likely it is that we can build enough support to prevail. But thanks to Public Knowledge, and the 15k+, who have helped carry this idea one step closer to reality. We've got CD's of all 15k+ of the signatures on our 55 Reclaim the Public Domain petition to hand out. It was going to be a fun day (as fun as any DC day gets) in DC. But we've now learned that Congresswoman 56 Lofgren (D-CA) and Congressman 57 Doolittle (R-CA) have agreed to introduce the bill into Congress. We're having an event at 1pm tomorrow at the Capitol to announce this first step on a long road to Reclaiming the Public Domain. Count this as great news, and spread the word: there are two great souls on Capitol Hill. Squabbles-about-egos-pretending-to-be-about-the-merits can never be quashed. I know from email early on that Dave too has the desire that progress be made. In return, he is asking people to help free more music by signing the petition to 67 Reclaim the Public Domain. As Phil writes, >Ever since the dawn of aviation it has been held that airspace belongs to the >public and is to be regulated for the benefit of all by the FAA. This is what, for >example, prevents the owner of a farm in Missouri from demanding that Delta >Airlines pay him a tax every time they fly over his farm. But there is a relevant pre-history here that is useful to remember. This, of course, created a problem once the history of aviation was born. For obviously, if I own all the space above my land, then companies like United are just napsterizing my property as they fly above my land. The Causby's, North Carolina farmers, complained because military aircraft were causing their chickens to fly in panic to their death as they smashed into the walls. The Causby's claimed "trespass" and demanded the military stop flying over their land. The Supreme Court rejected the argument that airplanes trespass. As Justice Douglas wrote for the Court, > The doctrine has no place in the modern world. Were that not true, every transcontinental flight >would subject the operator to countless trespass suits. To recognize such private claims to the airspace would clog these >highways, seriously interfere with their control and development in the public >interest, and transfer into private ownership that to which only the public has > a just claim. Simple, minimalist, with access to real content, and a nice blog roll of the scores of Dean blogs out there -- but for the absense of a 83 Creative Commons license, it is brilliant. There is a passion and a clarity to Dean's message which mixes well with the passion and, um, ok, just passion of the web. An extraordinary number have volunteered for his campaign because of the web. So far I've only met the one man Karl Rove seems most afraid of -- Edwards. As I've 85 blogged, I think a great deal of the Senator. Indeed, he is the first politician to inspire in a very long time. They have a fancy website that feels like a 4th of July commercial. That's all part of the strategy, they say, and again, who am I to question it. The plan is that Edwards should place in the first two primaries. But because he will have more money than anyone, he will sweep the next 20. But I would think what the campaign against President Bush needs is the passion and commitment that is spilling out everywhere on the web -- mainly for candidates other than Edwards. How much could it cost to open a channel to enable this bottom-up rally? How bad would it really be to give Madison Avenue a rest? It just seems weird to me: between the son of a mill worker, and the son of an investment banker, which would you expect to run the populist campaign, in style if not in substance? If it were mine to call, I'd build a million from the bottom up, focusing on values that are common to us all -- truth (as opposed to lies); I've never won anything wonderful, save the love of the mother of our (soon to be born) boy. He built a search engine for RPI's network -- one of a half-dozen such engines running at the time. Three-fourths of the files in the directory were not music files. Yet he was sued by record companies, demanding hundreds of millions in damages. When they discovered that he had saved $12,000, they gave him a classic Sopranos-like choice: Either defend yourself in court (which would cost his family over $200,000) or pay us $12,000. He, and some of the other student defendants, have set-up donation booths. Whatever your view about these issues, you should consider contributing. Whether or not the RIAA is right about the law, there is something deeply wrong about using the law to squash the likes of Jesse. Yet as the RIAA lawyers knew, it would cost him more to fight this suit than to settle it. So his defense would never get a chance to show that the law is not yet as extreme as the RIAA lawyers would like it to be. Our legal system gives companies like A&M Records the power to do this to people like Jesse. We each, individually, by donating to these students, can help remove some of the burdens of that flaw. We all, collectively, should do something to change that legal system to remove tha...
|
http://csua.com/feed/