نحو ثقافة إبداعية جديدة: ازدهار التجارة والفنون في الاقتصاد الهجين

by Lawrence Lessig, أسامة فاروق حسن (Translator)

في هذا الكتاب، يسلط لورنس لسيج الضوء على أحدث الحروب الثقافية وربما أشدها ضررًا؛ تلك الحرب الموجهة ضد أبنائنا وغيرهم ممن يبتكرون الفنون ويستهلكونها. فالنظام القانوني الحالي، في واقع الأمر، يجرِّم هذه الأفعال. إلا أنه من خلال تبني ثقافة تمكِّن الجمهور من ابتكار الفن بنفس سهولة استهلاكه، سيكون بوسعنا أن نضمن حصول هؤلاء المبتكرين على الدعم الذي يحتاجونه ويستحقونه. وإننا بالفعل نرى الآن بوادر اقتصاد هجين جديد يجمع بين دوافع الربح في عالم التجارة والأعمال التقليدي و«الاقتصاد التشاركي» تظهر بجلاء في مواقع إنترنت على غرار ويكيبيديا ويوتيوب.

هذا الكتاب أشبه بدعوة بليغة ملحة لإنهاء حرب تؤذي أبناءنا وغيرهم من المستخدمين الجسورين للتكنولوجيا الجديدة. وهو أيضًا يعرض رؤية ملهِمة لعالم ما بعد هذه الحرب؛ عالم يحوي فرصًا عظيمة لمن يرون الفن مصدرًا تجب مشاركته بحرية وليس سلعة يجب احتكارها.

Genres: Nonfiction, Business, Technology, Law, Art, Economics, Politics

324 pages, ebook

First published January 1, 2008

About the author

Lawrence "Larry" Lessig is an American academic and political activist. He is best known as a proponent of reduced legal restrictions on copyright, trademark, and radio frequency spectrum, particularly in technology applications.

He is a director of the Edmond J. Safra Foundation Center for Ethics at Harvard University and a professor of law at Harvard Law School. Prior to rejoining Harvard, he was a professor of law at Stanford Law School and founder of its Center for Internet and Society.

Lessig is a founding board member of Creative Commons, a board member of the Software Freedom Law Center and a former board member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Reviews

[Kara Babcock · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'd recommend Remix to anyone who creates content, whether as part of their day job or simply as a hobby in their basement. Lawrence Lessig takes the complicated issues surrounding modern copyright and explains them in terms laypeople can comprehend. Moreover, he makes a compelling argument from an economic standpoint as to why less copyright could lead to more profit.

My favourite quotation from this book is:

Copyright law has got to give up its obsession with "the copy." The law should not regulate "copies" or "modern reproductions" on their own. It should instead regulate uses—like public distributions of copies of copyrighted work—that connect directly to the economic incentive copyright law was intended to foster.

Lessig succinctly reveals the flawed premise from which most corporations approach the concept of copyright in our digital age. Thanks to the Internet, it's now possible to distribute an infinite number of copies of a digital work. Regulating that work like it's a physical object doesn't work, as we saw empirically through the failed experiment of Digital Rights Management (DRM). Focusing on copying is a doomed tactic. Focusing on usage is a much better way to exercise one's control over one's content.

Never does Lessig advocate the abolition of copyright. I've often struggled with the very existence of this legal quagmire we've constructed. As a content creator in general, I am happy to release as much of my content as possible under a Creative Commons license. I love to let people benefit from my content by reusing it wherever possible. Yet, as a writer, I'm reluctant to do that for everything I produce, since traditional publishing still requires (at least in some cases) a traditional, all rights reserved copyright. So either I must accept copyright in some form, or I must abandon any hope of being published through "traditional" means.

Lessig's stance reassures me that there is nothing wrong with the concept of copyright itself--indeed, so-called "free" licenses, like Creative Commons and "copyleft" are also copyright, just of a different breed--the core dilemma we face is that copyright has become distorted during the twentieth century by increasingly restrictive regulation. Lessig argues that we need new legislation to remove our copyright quagmire and update our laws to reflect current cultural values. But how effective is his argument?

Having never read his previous works, I was in the dark regarding Lessig's rhetorical style, so I went into Remix with no expectations and an am unable to compare it to his other arguments. I found Remix both compelling and accessible. What truly surprised me was the types of premises Lessig used to advance his argument. Although both points of legality and appeals to ethos appear in Remix, Lessig's primary concern is one of economics. Would less restrictive copyright be better or worse for the economy? Is it still possible to derive value (i.e., make money) off a work with a less restrictive copyright? Lessig's answer is an unequivocal yes.

I admire this strategy more than I admire the argument itself, for I think it will go a long way toward convincing economists, lawyers, and business people--anyone concerned with making money from their content or the content of their clients--that less copyright isn't as scary as it seems. Remix is not the manifesto of a copyright revolutionary attempting to storm the Bastille of commerce and tear down the walls of sane legislation. Rather, Lessig points out that sometimes more control is less desirable--for instance, it can often bring unwanted liability to the copyright holder or stifle possible opportunities for fan-based revenue. Although making money is always a concern, it isn't necessarily the only concern--sometimes it's better to build customer loyalty or cultivate what Lessig terms a "sharing economy" than just reap profits.

I won't attempt to summarize all of Lessig's arguments here. Remix is short enough--perhaps my largest complaint about the book--and well-organized enough that anyone should be able to muddle through, and anyone with interest in these issues will derive enjoyment from it. Those of us who agree with Lessig's perspective are lucky to have such an eloquent and sharp voice for remixing. As for our opponents--well, if Remix doesn't persuade you, I at least hope that it opens your eyes as to why why some people promote remixing, beyond a twisted desire to steal profit from other content creators. Copyright certainly isn't a black and white issue; Remix succeeds in showing that it doesn't need a black and white answer.

[Mahmoud Aghiorly · Rating 4 out of 5]

هل قرأت ذات مرة كتاب تم نقله بدون إذن دار النشر او الكاتب ؟ هل استمعت إلى موسيقى لم تشتريها , هل شاهدت الافلام دون ان تأخذها من مصادرها الشرعية ؟ إن كانت جوابك نعم , وهو كذلك حتماً , فهذا الكتاب يتحدث تحديداً عن هذه الجزئية , فيتحدث لورنس ليسيج في هذا الكتاب , كتاب نحو ثقافة ابداعية جديدة , عن معضلة تجريم الشباب فيما يخص حقوق النشر والتأليف و كيف أن هناك حرب شعواء اليوم على الاستخدام الغير شرعي لابسط الحقوق وابسط المقاطع الفنية والموسيقية تقودها دور النشر والانتاج الكبيرة تجاه الافراد , ويحاجج ليسيج بأن هذه الحرب تقوم بخنق العملية الابداعية و الابتكارية ( دون أن يبرر السرقة ) , بل وتحد من مفهوم الثقافة ككل , وسوف تؤثر على عملية خلق واعادة تدوير الفن , ويصف ليسيج القانونين الحالية بأنها مختلة و فيها مشاكل كثيرة ولا تصب بالضرورة في تحقيق المصلحة العامة للفنانين والشركات ولا تحقق لهم الحد الاعلى من الارباح من بيع اعمالهم الاصلية وكان هذا الجزء الاول من الكتاب , اما في الجزء الثاني من الكتاب يتحدث الكاتب عن مقارنة بين الاقتصاد التجاري والاقتصاد التشاركي و يقدم بديلاً عملياً اطلق عليه اسم الاقتصاد الهجين مستندا الى نماذج المشاع الابداعي التي من وجهة نظر الكاتب تقدم الحل الامثل لمشاكل حقول التأليف والنشر ويدعو إلى عملية اصلاح شاملة لتلك القوانين وقال ان هذا يجب على قائمة اعمال الكونغرس الامريكي , الكتاب بصورة فيه العديد من الافكار المقنعة والمنطقية , وصحيح ان فكرة حقوق التأليف والنشر ليست شائعة جداً في العالم العربي و يسهل جداً " تهكير " الكتب والموسيقى والافلام , الا انها محاججات يجب ان يطلع عليها القارىء العربي لكي يدرك المناقشات التي تجري من حوله و خاصة ان كانت تلك القوانين سوف تجد طريقها عاجلا او آجلا للدول العربية وسوف تبدأ بالتأثير بنفس الشاكلة التي تحدث عنها الكاتب ,ويجب ان اذكر ان الكاتب لم يقم بأي صفحة من الكتاب بتبرير سرقة الاعمال الكاملة او الاستفادة الغير شرعية منها , انما كان يتحدث عن الفكرة والمغالة في مفهوم الحقوق ذاتها . الكتاب جيد جداً وانصح به و تقيمي له 4/5

مقتطفات من كتاب نحو ثقافة إبداعية جديدة للكاتب لورنس لسيج
------------------
أي نوع من الأسس الأخلاقية يمكن أن ينشأ عليه أبناؤنا، عندما ينظر إلى سلوكهم الاعتيادي على أنه سلوك إجرامي؟ أي شيء سيصبحون عليه؟ وما الجرائم الأخرى التي ستبدو بالنسبة إليهم أمرًا طبيعيٍّا؟
-------------------
إننا نمرر قانونًا كي نحظر سلوكًا، لكننا نادرًا ما نبحث مليٍّا كيفية تغيير ذلك القانون للسلوك. كما أننا لا نقيم مدى الإزعاج الذي من الممكن أن يسببه القانون لو ظل السلوك على ما هو عليه
--------------------
كل منا يرتبط بالعمل الفني بطريقته الخاصة. ويسري الارتباط لدى البعضإلى أعماقهم، بينما يمر مرور الكرام لدى البعض الآخر. وفي بعض الأحيان يمسك بتلابيبنا، ويشدنا نحوه بقوة. وفي أحيان أخرى يغيرنا تغييرًا جذريٍّا
---------------------
فإن جميع الدلائل تعد بخلق مزيجًا استثنائيٍّا من الماضي والحاضر لصنع مستقبل أسطوري أكثر ازدهارًا. ولا يشترط بالضرورة أن يكون ذلك المستقبل إما أقل ميلًا نحو القراءة فقط أو أكثر ميلًا نحو القراءة والكتابة؛ وإنما من الممكن أن يجمع بين كليهما
----------------------
إذا لم تكن تريد أن يستولي أحد على أشيائك، اجعل شراءها متاحًا له بسهولة. ويجسد يوتيوب صورة الطلب غير المُلبى
-----------------------
عام ٢٠٠3 عثرت أشهر خدمة في مجال تتبع المدونات، وهي تكنوراتي على ١٠٠ ألف مدونة لا غير. وبعدها بستة شهور، زاد هذا العدد إلى مليون. وبعد عام، أدرجت أكثر من ٤ ملايين مدونة. 8 واليوم يوجد أكثر من ١٠٠ مليون مدونة على مستوى العالم؛ حيث أضيفت أكثر من ١٥ مدونة خلال الفترة التي قضيتها في قراءة هذه العبارة. وطبقًا لما صرحت به تكنوراتي، فإن اللغة اليابانية الآن هي لغة التدوين رقم واحد على مستوى العالم. ودخلت اللغة الفارسية لتوها ضمن المراكز العشرة الأولى.
------------------------
لا تسمح بفرصة للمتملقين والمتزلفين ولا تشجعهم. كافئ المنتقدين.
-----------------------
يمثل الإنترنت سياقًا يشجع على الأخلاقيات الديمقراطية التي يعدان مثالًا لها. إنه الموضع الذي تتحول فيه جميع الكتابات إلى القراءة والكتابة
-----------------------
الأفراد الذين بلغوا من العمر ٧٥ عامًا أو تجاوزوها أمضوا ما متوسطه ١٫٤ ساعة في القراءة من كل يوم من أيام عطلة نهاية الأسبوع و ٠٫٢ ساعة ( ١٢ دقيقة) يلعبون الألعاب أو يستخدمون جهاز الكمبيوتر في التسلية. وعلى العكس من ذلك، الأفراد الذين تتراوح أعمارهم بين ١٥ إلى ١٩ عامًا يقرءون في المتوسط ٠٫١ ساعة ( ٧ دقائق) من كل يوم من أيام عطلة نهاية الأسبوع وأمضوا ١ ساعة في لعب الألعاب أو استخدام الكمبيوتر في التسلية
-------------------------
هناك عدة مئات من البوكيمونات المتنوعة، كل واحد منها له أشكال تطورية متعددة ومجموعة معقدة من المنافسين والملحقات. ولا يوجد نصواحد يمكن للمرء التوجه إليه كي يحصل على معلومات عن الأنواع المختلفة؛ وإنما، يقوم الطفل بتجميع ما يعرفه عن البوكيمون من مختلف الوسائط، ويتوصل إلى نتيجة؛ ألا وهي أنه يعلم شيئًا ما، لا يعلمه أصدقاؤه، ومن ثم تصبح لديه الفرصة لتقاسم تلك الخبرة مع الآخرين هذا الأسلوب الأشهر يدفع الأطفال نحو ابتكار حيوات أكثر اقترابًا من شخصية كل منهم، وتطوير مسارات ذات توجه مزجي نحو المحتوى أما الأطفال الأمريكيون فالأمر بالنسبة لهم مختلف؛ إذ ليس التركيز منصبٍّا على فكرة إليكم شيئًا ما، فاصنعوا شيئًا به وإنما بدلًا من ذلك ينصب التركيز على فكرة إليكم شيئًا ما، فاشتروه
-------------------
كل مدرسة ثانوية في أمريكا يجب أن تقدم منهجًا دراسيٍّا في محو الأمية الوسائطية. إننا مطمورون في هذا الشيء. إننا نتنفسه. إننا نتجرعه باستمرار. إنها أنباء ومعلومات على مدار اليوم والأسبوع وثقافة شعبية … إذا كنت تحاول تربية أطفالك على التحلي بتفكير نقدي حيال التاريخ والمجتمع والثقافة، فعليك أن تشجعهم على أن يكونوا مفكرين وناقدين للوسائط والمعلومات والإعلان
----------------------
فالقدرة على توجيه العائد التجاري من وراء الموسيقى أو الأفلام أتاحت لكثيرين إبداع ما لم يكن في استطاعتهم، لولا ذلك، أن يبدعوه. وهذه هي الوظيفة الصحيحة لقانون حقوق التأليف والنشر، وهي مبرره الطيب الوحيد. وحيثما نجد أن غياب ذلك القانون الخاص من الممكن أن يعرقل الإبداع، يصير لذلك القانون مبرره المنطقي والبديهي
---------------------
اللحظة التي بدأ فيها لأول مرة يعترض على تحول معين في حبكة القصة، وقدم رؤيته هو، كانت من أسعد لحظات حياتي أريد أن أرى هذه القدرة مُعبَّرًا عنها ليس بالكلمات وحدها. أريد أن أرى من يعبر عنها بجميع أشكال المعاني الثقافية. أريد أن أشاهده وهو يغير نهاية أغنية يعشقها، أو يغير من سمات إحدى شخصيات فيلم يرى نفسه فيه بقوة، أو يرسم صورة كي يعبر عن فكرة كانت قبل ذلك مجرد فكرة كامنة في عقله الباطن. أريد بداخله هذه القدرة على القراءة والكتابة، بشكل عام. أريده أن يكون ذلك الشخص الذي يمكنه الإبداع من خلال إعادة صياغة الأشي��ء.
---------------------
خاض كل جيل من قبل تجربة إصرار الجيل الأسبق له على أن الجديد في حالة انحلال، وأن القديم وحده هو الرائع
-------------------
تاريخ محو الأمية، تلك القدرة على الفهم التي لا تأتي من مجرد الإنصات السلبي، وإنما تأتي كذلك من الكتابة. منذ نعومة أظفار الثقافة الإنسانية، كان الآباء يعلمون أطفالهم إبداع القراءة والكتابة؛ أي إننا علمناهم كيف يضيفون إلى الثقافة الموجودة حولنا عن طريق الاستنباط من تلك الثقافة أو نقدها
-------------------
المسلك الراهن للقانون يجمع بين كونه تدميريٍّا وانهزاميٍّا؛ إذ إنه يدمر قيمًا أهم من الأرباح التي تجنيها الصناعات الثقافية
---------------
إننا بحاجة لإلغاء تجريم الإبداع حتى لا نواصل تجريم جيل كامل من أبنائنا.
-----------------
فالذكي في وقت من الأوقات ليس بالضرورة ذكيٍّا في وقت لاحق؛ ولهذا نحن في حاجة إلى شركات جديدة
---------------
لديك أصدقاء، وتحيا تلك الصداقة داخل إطار اقتصاد معين. إذا كنت دومًا تأخذ دون أن تعطي، فإن الصداقة سوف تتلاشى. إذا كنت تقيس كل تعامل بمقياس مادي وتطالب بتسوية بعد كل معاملة، فإن الصداقة في هذه الحالة أيضًا تزول
--------------
الفارق الجوهري بين تبادل السلع وتبادل الهدايا هو أن الهدية ترسخ رابطة من المشاعر بين الناس، في حين أن بيع سلعة ما لا يترك في قلوبهم بالضرورة رابطة ما. فأنا أذهب إلى متجر أجهزة مثلًا، وأدفع للبائع ثمن نصل منشار معادن ثم أنصرف. ربما لن أراه بعد ذلك مطلقًا. وعدم الارتباط، في حقيقة الأمر، يعد حسنة تميز أسلوب السلع. فنحن لا نريد أن يشغل بالنا شيء. فلو أن البائع يثرثر على الدوام بكلام عن العائلة، فسوف أذهب للتسوق من مكان آخر. فكل ما أريده شراء نصل منشار المعادن وكفى
--------------------
تبني الاقتصادات التجارية قيمةً يقبع المال في جوهرها. أما الاقتصادات التشاركية فتبني القيمة متجاهلةً المال. وكلتاهما جوهري للحياة سواء على شبكة الإنترنت أو خارجها. وكلتاهما سوف يتعاظم ازدهاره مع تطور تكنولوجيا الإنترنت.
----------------
لا يوجد شيء في العوالم الافتراضية يجعل الناس أكثر تحليًا بالفضيلة
-------------------
إذا شعر الكيان الهجين أنه مفرط في الاقتراب من التعامل التجاري، فإن هذا الأمر يمتص عصارة حماس المتطوعين نحو العمل
-------------------
هناك نظم من القيمة غير المال، أو بالإضافة إلى المال، تشكل أهمية بالغة للناس: الارتباط بأناس آخرين، وإنشاء هوية على شبكة الإنترنت، والتعبير عن الذات، وأيضًا — وهو ليس أقلها أهمية — الاستحواذ على انتباه الآخرين. إن الشبكة العنكبوتية — والعالم في حقيقة الأمر — سوف تتحول إلى مكان أكثر فقرًا بكثير بدون السخاء الجماعي من المساهمين فيه. إن ثقافة السخاء تعد بالفعل العمود الفقري للإنترنت
---------------------
كل شركة تبني نموذجًا هجينًا سوف تواجه بالضبط نفس هذا التحدي: كيف تضع إطارًا لعملك، وللربح الذي تتوقعه، بأسلوب لا يفزع مجتمعك فيبعده عنك.
------------------------
نحن لدينا منظومة من التكنولوجيا تدعو أطفالنا كي يكونوا مبدعين. غير أن المنظومة القانونية تحظر عليهم الإبداع على نحو قانوني. ومن ثم يخفق تنظيم ذلك الإبداع في اتباع كل معيار مهم من معايير الكفاءة والعدالة
--------------------------
إننا بحاجة لصياغة مجموعة من الأعراف التي توجهنا ونحن نخوضتجربة ثقافة القراءة والكتابة ونبني اقتصادات هجينة. إننا بحاجة لوضع مجموعة من الأحكام التي تتعلق بأسلوب التعامل المناسب مع التعبير الذي يتصادف أنه لا يستهوينا. إننا، كمجتمع، في حاجة لوضع تلك المعايير ونشرها
---------------------------
لقد تركنا للتو قرنًا بلغت فيه السلطة الحكومية في جميع أنحاء العالم حدٍّا لم تبلغه في أي وقت مضىمن تاريخ الإنسانية، وكذلك أيضًا كانت توقعات الناس التي ينتظرونها من الحكومات. فعند نقطة ما في مسار القرن، صار من الطبيعي إلى حد بعيد أن نتخيل أن باستطاعة الحكومة أن تفعل أي شيء، وعند نقطة ما، بدا من البديهي أن العائق الأوحد أمام سلطة الحكومة هو عدم الكفاءة الحكومية
---------------------------
ففي بلد ديمقراطي، لا يعني المزيد من السلطة المزيد من النجاح، وإنما مثل سيارة تحاول تحرير نفسها من حفرة جليدية، في الديمقراطيات، غالبًا ما يعني المزيد من السلطة هزيمة الذات، فهناك حد لما تستطيع الحكومات عمله لا يمكن ببساطة التغلب عليه بإضافة المزيد من السلطة أو الموارد إلى المشكلة، فعند نقطة ما، إضافة المزيد من التحكم التنظيمي بالتشريعات يقلل من السيطرة الفعلية على الهدف.
----------------------------
فكلما نظر الأبناء إلى القانون المنظم للثقافة على أنه لا عقل له، أو الأسوأ من ذلك أنه قانون فاسد، فإن ذلك يجعلهم أقل ميلًا لإطاعة تلك القوانين. وكلما نظروا إلى تلك القوانين الخالية من المنطق باعتبارها مؤشرًا دالًا على المنظومة القانونية إجمالًا، صاروا أقل ميلًا لإطاعة تلك القوانين بشكل عام. ونمو تلك العادة في الأذهان، لا سيما أذهان الشباب، والمتمثلة في تحاشي القوانين لأنهم يعتبرونها خطأً أو سخيفة أو ببساطة غيرَ منصفة؛ يُنمي أسلوبًا في التفكير يمكن أن ينسحب على مواضع أخرى غير الموضع الأصلي
--------------------------------
بينما الشيء المجاني دون شك أمر طيب، فإنه لو كان كل شيء مجانيٍّا، لما كان هناك حافز قوي للإنتاج. ولو لم يكن هناك حافز نقدي كافٍ للإنتاج، فإنه، حسبما يتخوف رجال الاقتصاد، لن تُنتَج أشياء بالقدر الكافي.
---------------------------------
ولو كان بمقدور أي شخص عمل نسخة عالية الجودة من أحد أفلام هوليوود لحظة نزوله دور العرض، فلن يكون بمقدور أيشركة إنتاج أن تنتج فيلمًا بميزانية قدرها مائة مليون دولار
-----------------------------------
الحرب في مسألة حقوق التأليف والنشر تلحق بمجتمعنا الكثير من الضرر، ليس فقط نتيجة للخسائر في الابتكار، وليس فقط بسبب خنق أنواع معينة من الإبداع، وليس فقط لأنها تحد دون مبرر من حريات يكفلها الدستور، ولكن أيضًا، والأهم؛ لأن هذه الحرب تفسد جيلًا بأكمله من أبنائنا، إننا نشن حربًا ضد أطفالنا، وأطفالنا سوف يصيرون العدو، سوف يصبحون هم المجرمين الذين نَسِمُهم بهذا الوصف، ولأنه لا يوجد برهان قوي يشير إلى أننا سوف ننتصرفي هذه الحرب، فإن هذا هو المبرر الوحيد في هذا العالم لكي نوقف تلك الأعمال العدائية، لا سيما عندما تكون هناك بدائل تدعم الاهتمام الحكومي المزعوم دون أن تحول جيلًا كاملًا إلى مجرمين
--------------------------

[Sonia Reppe · Rating 2 out of 5]

We live in a remix culture. We share, exchange, spread, criticize, and build upon numerous creative works. Because of the increasing digitization of our culture, every use of a work produces a copy; hence copyright laws are more far-reaching. Too far, Lessing says. He says that copyright laws need to be redefined.
He proposes:
1. Deregulate Amateur Creativity
2. Clear Title
3. Simplify
4. Decriminalize the Copy
5. Decriminalize File Sharing

What does this mean for librarians? (I ask this because I had to read this for Intro to Library Science).
According to the ALA web site: "DRM, if not carefully balanced, limits the ability of libraries and schools to serve the information needs of their users and their communities."
It limits or could limit secondary transfer of works (this is what libraries do with legally acquired content); it could prevent copying content onto new formats, this will prevent libraries from preserving and providing long-term access; it could eliminate fair use, such as printing and quoting.
This is a sticky situation and Lessig makes a good argument and also offers solutions. I appreciated being made to think on the big inpact this has on access of information, but I did not understand his three chapters on economy. He talks about Wikipedia and Youtube but I didn't understand how this tied in to his argument.

[Giovanni Dall'Orto · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nel medioevo i signorotti feudali vantavano una serie di diritti di proprietà sui beni d'uso collettivo o individuale, per i quali pretendevano il pagamento d'una tassa: il focatico per il diritto ad accendere il fuoco, il legnatico per il diritto di fare legna nel bosco e così via, includendo l'uso del mulino, dei pascoli e chi più ne ha più ne metta. Collettivamente questi diritti si chiamavano "angarìe" o "angherìe", e il fatto che oggi la parola "angheria" non significhi affatto "retribuzione del diritto di proprietà" la dice lunga sulla loro reale natura.

In modo molto simile, oggi, una serie sempre maggiore di beni usati da tutti sono stati sottoposti a copyright, al punto che è diventato impossibile vivere senza infrangere qualche legge.
La proliferazione "feudale" del diritto di copyright, che ormai copre perfino interi esseri viventi, geni del nostro corpo, semi, la silhouete di un palazzo, l'illuminazione della Tour Eiffel, il diritto di fotografare una stazione ferroviaria, la canzoncina "Tanti auguri a te" (sì, in teoria per cantarla voi dovreste pagare i diritti d'autore: questa è la legge, e se non pagate o dissentite, siete "pirati", vi piaccia o no).... è arrivato al punto da costituire un oggettivo ostacolo al progresso della ricerca. Ovvero a sortire l'effetto opposto a quello per cui fu in origine inventato, che era favorire l'innovazione concedendo al creatore o scopritore un monopolio d'utilizzo della sua creazione per un certo numero d'anni (in origine 20, oggi ormai anche 140/160...).

A fronte d'una problematica di questa portata questo libro, che s'interroga sul "futuro del copyright" non la racconta del tutto giusta. L'autore, un giurista, lascia trasparire di saperne molto di più di quanto non dica effettivamente. Questo perché il suo cerca di essere un libro di "pacificazione" in un campo in cui l'accanimento delle polemiche è stato, in passato, proporzionale al volume di denaro generato dai cugini moderni delle angarie.
Il che non toglie, però, che Lessig la sappia molto lunga, e che nel libro lo dimostri.

Certo, per chi si è interessato al dibattito, questo appare come un testo introduttivo più che di approfondimento. Lo scopo divulgativo dell'autore è infatti evidente non solo nel tono semplice e piano, ma anche nel fatto che ripete sempre due o tre volte ogni argomento, in modo che s'imprima nella testa del lettore meno avvertito... e che annoi qui e là gli altri lettori...

Questo non vuol dire che l'autore sia superficiale. Tutt'altro. Si vede che domina l'argomento, che conosce bene ciò di cui parla, ed è perfettamente addentro soprattutto al campo di massimo scontro sul tema: la Rete.

Nel suo sforzo di dare un poco ragione a tutti i partecipanti alla disputa, Lessig ricorda come il diritto di riutilizzare parti della produzione creativa altrui sia sempre stato la ragion d'essere fondamentale della cultura, fin da quando esiste. A iniziare dai linguaggi artistici ed espressivi.
E' solo la pretesa, recentissima, di controllare ogni aspetto della creazione artistica (ivi incluso il "remix", ovvero la sua utilizzazione come base di partenza per creazioni nuove ed originali) che ha creato conflitti che, Lessig argomenta, non hanno ragione d'esistere, in quanto è nel miglior interesse delle stesse aziende permettere che i fans contribuiscano alla "creazione collettiva" su cui si basa il successo di un artista.
I fans di Guerre stellari o di Harry Potter fanno parte degli assets commerciali del franchise, e non dei nemici da combattere come pirati, come hanno fatto gli ottusi avvocati a cui Hollywood si è affidata per troppo tempo: "Sembra che nessuno si sia reso conto che il valore monetario di tutto il tempo passato a bisticciare riguardo ai diritto d'autore ha superato di gran lunga qualunque quota di licensing possibile. L'aspetto economico non era rilevante. Era una questione di principio". (p. XXXIII)

Permettere ai nostri ragazzi di creare, mescolare, remixare i contenuti culturali del loro tempo è solo giusto e utile.
Del resto, aggiunge Lessing, cosa vogliamo fare, criminalizzare un'intera generazione? Abituandola così a credere che sia concepibile solo o la pirateria o l'assenza di creazione e innovazione?
Certo, Lessig prende le distanze da chi crede che l'utilizzo della produzione intellettuale dovrebbe essere sempre gratuito. Ma lo fa al tempo stesso anche da chi pensa che non debba esserlo mai.

Lessig insiste poi molto su come il concetto di "proprietà intellettuale" sia concepito in modo totalmente nuovo da parte della generazione Internet.
E da bravo docente torna più e più volte sul bisogno di non criminalizzare "i nostri ragazzi", spezzando una lancia a favore di un ripensamento dei modi d'utilizzo della proprietà intellettuale, così da consentire lo sviluppo della loro creatività anche attraverso il mashup e il remix.

Dunque, questo è un libro che, apparentemente, non chiede di rimettere in discussione l'assurda legislazione delle angarie del copyright, nel senso di ridurla a dimensioni più ragionevoli (ormai i brevetti sono un incubo anche per le aziende per le quali sono state riscritte le leggi e che ne detengono a migliaia, perché per molte piccole aziende è diventato infinitamente più redditizio brevettare a tappeto qualsiasi scematina, anche irrilevante, e poi restare come ragni sulla tela in attesa di prendere al varco le varie Microsoft, Apple o Nokia denunciandole per furto di proprietà intellettuale e chiedendo risarcimenti astronomici). Ma al tempo stesso non è certo un libro scritto per fare piacere alle multinazionali del copyright.

Lessing piacerà semmai a tutti coloro che ritengono il dibattito sulla riduzione della portata del diritto d'autore una pericolosa pretesa comunista, perché si spinge tanto lontano quanto è possibile farlo senza mettere in discussione radicalmente le attuali leggi sul copyright (anche se un capitolo intero, il 9, è dedicato al tema "Riformare la legge").
Al tempo stesso, Lessing fornisce una serie di racconti di casi concreti di conflitto fra detentori di copyright e comunità della Rete, molti utili e molto interessanti, che dimostrano meglio di mille proclami le assurdità a cui ci ha portato l'attuale legislazione eccessivamente restrittiva.

Diciamo quindi che per essere un libro sul "futuro del copyright" questo è un po' troppo timido ed equidistante. Fa un po' l'effetto di un libro scritto nel 1780 per proporre una riforma "equa" del focatico...

Era comunque un tentativo di sintesi fra posizioni opposte che andava fatto e, tenendo conto di quest'ottica, nel suo genere è anche un tentativo ottimamente riuscito.
Sicuramente questa è una delle migliori trattazioni del tema in un'ottica argomentativa, e non di critica, delle attuali leggi e della attuale situazione.

Che poi dalla parte opposta si agitino campagne per l'abolizione pura e semplice della data di scadenza del copyright, che così verrebbe trasformato in un vero e proprio diritto feudale ereditario, questo è un altro paio di maniche.
Solo il tempo dirà se l'approccio di Lessig era troppo ottimistico, perfettamente azzeccato, o troppo pessimistico...

[Kendra · Rating 5 out of 5]

Why are we criminalizing our youth with copyright wars? That is the central question Lessig asks. The creative process and the tools that now exist to make the art of today's times should not be stifled the way it currently is. If the objective is to reward artists and the corporations which sponsor them and to limit the ways that others could infringe upon their ability to sell their original work, then there are more productive and less litigious methods of meeting those ends. Copyright law has not always operated at its current level of dysfunction. Models exist (Creative Commons) which show what a healthier solution might look like. Lessig provides justification for change and spells out the dangers of continuing along the current trajectory. Highly readable and still quite relevant ten years after publication.

[Paul · Rating 2 out of 5]

Lessig's core arguments -- about how copyright has worked in the past, how it works now, and how it should work -- are still solid. But some of his predictions have, with the benefit of hindsight, proven to be way off the mark.

This is a book that really needs a revised edition.

[Tareef Mando · Rating 5 out of 5]

ازداد النقاش في العالم العربي خلال السنوات القليلة الماضية عن قوانين الملكية الفكرية، وما يجب وما لا يجب اتباعه.. وفي العموم تزداد الأهمية العالمية لإيجاد صيغة قانونية تسمح في تشجيع الانتاج الابداعي (ماديًا ومعنويًا) كما تُسهّل عملية تشاركه وإعادة انتاجه

يحمل الكاتب همًا واضحًا في معظم الفصول، إذ تقلقه مصطلحات "الحرب على القرصنة" و"القراصنة" والمتداولة بكثرة من طرف مالكي الحقوق الحصرية لنشر الأعمال الثقافية المختلفة لوصف المستهلكين الذين يحصلون على نسخ من تلك الأعمال بطريقة "غير قانونية" - مثل التورنت. يقول "أي نوع من الأسس الأخلاقية يُمكن أن ينشأ عليه أبناؤنا؛ عندما يُنظر إلى سلوكهم الاعتيادي على أنه سلوك إجرامي؟ أي شيء سيصبحون عليه؟ وما الجرائم الأخرى التي سبتدو بالنسبة إليهم أمرًا طبيعيًا؟.. إن تجريم جيل بأكمله لهو ثمن باهظٌ للغاية كي ندفعه مقابل أي غاية، مهما كانت"

ينطلق المؤلف من الأساس الأخلاقي السابق ليؤكد على:
- ضرورة وجود منظومة قانونية تهتم بحقوق التأليف والنشر لتأمين حوافز تدفع المؤلفين نحو الإبداع
- إمكانية صياغة تلك المنظومة لتحقق ذلك الغرض ودون الاضرار إلى تجريم سلوك أبناء هذا العصر، أي بما يسمح بحرية مشاركة تلك الأعمال

يذكر الكتاب على سبيل المثال أحد المقترحات التي تقدّم بها ويليام فيشر الأستاذ بجامعة هارفرد، والتي يسمح القانون بموجبها تداول الملفات الموسيقية بحرية تامة مع فرض ضريبة إجبارية ثابتة تُضاف - مثلا - إلى تكلفة اشتراكك بخط الإنترنت.
بعد ذلك يمكن من خلال تقنيات تعقب بسيطة معرفة كمّ مرة تم تداول الأغنية (سين) ما يُحدد بدوره مقدار الأرباح التي سيتم تحويلها للمغني صاحب تلك الأغنية.

بغض النظر عن قدرتنا على نقد الاقتراح السابق أو تحسينه فإن ما فعله السياسيون خلال العشر سنوات الماضية لم يصب في خانة إيجاد الحلول وإنما في دفع تكاليف طائلة في إطار الحرب على القرصنة، رغم ذلك فإن تلك الحرب قد فشلت، حيث تُشير الاحصاءات أن ثلثي طلاب الجامعة يحصلون على ملفاتهم الموسيقية من خلال برامج الند-للند والتي يتوفر من خلالها أي مقطوعة موسيقية تقريبًا.

في نصف الكتاب الثاني ينتقل المؤلف للحديث عن الاقتصاد في عصر الانترنت، حيث يصنفه إلى نوعين رئيسين:
- اقتصاد تجاري (وهو الاقتصاد التقليدي) السعر مقابل السلعة
- اقتصاد تشاركي (جميعنا نساهم ونحصل على الكل) مثل ويكيبيديا مثلا
ويشرح خصائص كل اقتصاد على حدا، لينتقل للحديث عن "الاقتصاد الهجين" الذي يدمج فيه خصائص من كلا النظامين السابقين، يذكر مثال شركة ريدهات وكيف استطاعت الجمع بين نوعي الاقتصاد لتحقيق نجاح باهر بمعايير مجتمعية تسمح للجميع بالمشاركة والاستفادة من جهودهم بشكل مجاني

يختتم المؤلف كتابه بمقاربة أكثر شمولية للأمور، إذ قول ما الذي تفعله حكومتنا حيال المشاكل الأخرى؟
"في خلال السنوات العشر الماضية وفي وقت كان الكونغرس قد مرر ما لا يقل عن أربعة وعشرين مشروع قانون خاص بحقوق التأليف والنشر ما الذي فعلته حكومتنا تجاه الزئبق الذي يخرج مع عادمات محطات الكهرباء التي تعمل بالفحم.. هل تعتبر الحكومة مشكلة "القرصنة" أكثر خطرًا من المشاكل الحقيقة التي تواجهنا؟"

إجمالًا، استمتعتُ للغاية في قراءة الكتاب، وبالاطلاع على الأطروحات الجديدة التي قدمّها المؤلف لبناء ثقافة جديدة في ظل اقتصاد هجين.

[Jackie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Every time I pick up a book by him, I am always impressed by Lawrence Lessig's capacity at storytelling. There aren't many people who are simultaneously talented academics and lawyers - expert enough to argue cases before the supreme court - who can also tell stories relevant to their subject in a manner that would be captivating to any audience and at the same time manages to explain technical legal, economic, and philosophical points. This book by Lessig focuses on recent changes in the legal rules surrounding access to and use of culture and knowledge of various sorts in the US - forms of information and innovation often thought of as "intellectual property." This book does a beautiful job explaining the dangers of an overly stringent intellectual property regime and the benefits for society - and our children - that come from permitting greater access to and ability to build further upon the innovations of others.

I can't speak to what this book has to add over Lessig's "Future of Ideas" and "Free Culture," as I've only read pieces of these books and some years ago. Certainly his narrative style in this book lived up to the engaging style of his classic "Code" from a decade ago. I selected to read this over the less recent books on the knowledge economy, as this field changes so quickly that I was interested in his most recent work on the subject. Having enjoyed this book, I would recommend it highly, as I would his previous works on the topic.

The subject of this book - which Lessig dedicates to our country's youth and their need to have the ability to access and build from our intellectual and cultural heritage - became more salient immediately after I completed this book, with the sad suicide of Aaron Schwarz, an incredibly talented 26 year old computer genius and political activist who had been legally persecuted for his efforts to make JSTOR academic research articles available for free to those who do not have membership in elite academic communities.

[Saraq · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good, but I kind of felt like it was preaching to the choir without giving much substance as far as how to bring copyright law effectively into the digital age. If you're a newbie to copyright and/or copyright on the web this would be a great read. I'd also recommend it to people who don't understand why they don't have free reign to copy and distribute at will what they find online. Lessig tells us that copyright can work in the digital area, but that we need to make changes and why- I'm ready to read more about the how.

[Shawn Roberts · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very convincing argument that copyright laws as they stand are not doing the job. Anyone interested in this issue should at least give this a skim. Lessig's writing style, full of unfunny asides, can get annoying and there are some obvious editing mistakes that I can't believe weren't caught. There are also (as is typical in business books) way too many examples and not enough content binding them together. In sum, I'd say read the opening, skim the middle pages and tune back in for the conclusion.

[Casey Browne · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'd recommend Remix to anyone who creates content, whether as part of their day job or simply as a hobby in their basement. Lawrence Lessig takes the complicated issues surrounding modern copyright and explains them in terms laypeople can comprehend. Moreover, he makes a compelling argument from an economic standpoint as to why less copyright could lead to more profit.

My favourite quotation from this book is:

Copyright law has got to give up its obsession with "the copy." The law should not regulate "copies" or "modern reproductions" on their own. Instead, it should regulate uses—like public distributions of copies of copyrighted work—that connect directly to the economic incentive copyright law was intended to foster.


Lessig succinctly reveals the flawed premise from which most corporations approach the concept of copyright in our digital age. Thanks to the Internet, it's now possible to distribute an infinite number of digital work copies. Regulating that work like it's a physical object doesn't work, as we saw empirically through Digital Rights Management's failed experiment (DRM). Focusing on copying is a doomed tactic. Focusing on usage is a much better way to exercise one's control over one's content.

Lessig's stance reassures me that there is nothing wrong with the concept of copyright itself--indeed, so-called "free" licenses, like Creative Commons and "copyleft" are also copyright, just of a different breed--the core dilemma we face is that copyright has become distorted during the twentieth century by increasingly restrictive regulation. Lessig argues that we need new legislation to remove our copyright quagmire and update our laws to reflect current cultural values. But how effective is his argument?

Having never read his previous works, I was in the dark regarding Lessig's rhetorical style, so I went into Remix with no expectations. I am unable to compare it to his other arguments. I found Remix both compelling and accessible. What truly surprised me was the types of premises Lessig used to advance his argument. Although both points of legality and appeals to ethos appear in Remix, Lessig's primary concern is economics. Would less restrictive copyright be better or worse for the economy? Is it still possible to derive value (i.e., make money) from work with less restrictive copyright? Lessig's answer is an unequivocal yes.

I admire this strategy more than I admire the argument itself, for I think it will go a long way toward convincing economists, lawyers, and business people--anyone concerned with making money from their content or the content of their clients--that less copyright isn't as scary as it seems. Remix is not the manifesto of a copyright revolutionary attempting to storm the Bastille of commerce and tear down the walls of sane legislation. Rather, Lessig points out that sometimes more control is less desirable. It can often bring unwanted liability to the copyright holder or stifle possible opportunities for fan-based revenue. Although making money is always a concern, it isn't necessarily the only concern--sometimes it's better to build customer loyalty or cultivate what Lessig terms a "sharing economy" than reap profits.

I won't attempt to summarize all of Lessig's arguments here. The book is short enough--perhaps my largest complaint about the book--and well-organized enough that anyone should be able to muddle through, and anyone with interest in these issues will derive enjoyment from it. Those who agree with Lessig's perspective are lucky to have such an eloquent and sharp voice for remixing. As for our opponents--well, if Remix doesn't persuade you, I at least hope that it opens your eyes as to why some people promote remixing beyond a twisted desire to steal profit from other content creators. Copyright certainly isn't a black and white issue; Remix succeeds in showing that it doesn't need a black and white answer.

[Joseph Palumbo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Today, we live in an age where technology has vastly expanded our scope and understanding of media and how we share it with others. Through his book "Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy", Harvard professor Lawrence Lessig asks us to explore the possibilities presented to us in this new "industrial revolution" of media technology, particularly concerning how our legal system (and society as a whole) deals with "remix culture".

Lessig argues that because media has become more accessible than ever before, we must reevaluate how we share media with the general public and what the role (if any) copyright laws should play in the ongoing decades of the new millennium. He insists that the knowledge and application of multimedia tools are, in fact, the next step in the evolution of human literacy (following the ability to read and write). Because of this notion, Lessig believes that the current generation is stifled by antiquated legislation governing the ability to transform art and culture. Children today, while immersed in this cultural revolution, have a hard time comprehending why amateur appropriation of media would have them at odds with our legal system. They are rightfully concerned that the laws governing the exchange of content are lagging behind with the culture of the digital age. Nevertheless, Lessig and other likeminded online activists say that, even with such criminalizing, remix culture will never truly go away.

Being central to the premise of his book, Lessig writes about three models that exist within the current multimedia landscape. The first being "commercial economy", which is driven by monetary value. The second being the "sharing economy", which focuses on all value outside of the monetary system. Third and finally, the "hybrid economy" (which his book primarily concerns) borrows elements of the former models and will expand as the internet becomes more powerful. Lessig believes that protecting the hybrid economy is essential to preserving the other two models and that copyright reform will be necessary if we wish to encourage cultural and societal growth. He also believes that forsaking such reform will have tremendous implications on current generations' morality, understanding, and appreciation of law itself. If left unchecked, the government will ferment an environment where the people will be bullied into submission for the "crime" of creating and sharing content and information.

For those who are interested in this subject as I am, I couldn't recommend this book more. The concepts, from the get-go, are an enthralling read. Lessig uses legal and cultural terminology in such a clear and digestible way, that it could easily pass as basic schoolroom curriculum. Moreover, it shows the potential for a society that values the free exchange of media and contrasts it with the all too real obstacles that stand in its way. As demonstrated with its extensive footnotes and citations, it is both highly informative and well researched. The ideas it contains are not only illuminating, but I believe they also hold the key to a brighter future for civilization.

[الشناوي محمد جبر · Rating 2 out of 5]

الكتاب يتحدث عن تطور واضح في التعامل مع الثقافة كإنتاج واستهلاك، فالثقافة الآن ومع تغير وسائل إنتاجها ووسائل حماية حقوق الملكية الفكرية أصبحت بحاجة إلي قوانين جديدة لإعادة تنظيم عملية إنتاجها وتةزيعها وحماية حقوق المنتجين. فالموسيقي والكتب والأفلام أصبحت تنتج وتوزع بوسائل تكنولوجية لم تعد تعتمد علي شركات كبيرة الحجم باستثمارات كبيرة كما كان الحال في الماضي، بل أصبح من الممكن لفتي صغير أن ينتج فيما أو أغنية أو غير ذلك، كذلك أصبحت لتكنولوجيا في خدمة التوزيع الذي أصبح فائق السرعة مما يؤثر علي أرباح المنتجين. لكل ذلك أصبح العالم في حاجة إلي تغيير وجهة النظر إلي المنتج الثقافي وإعادة النظر في قوانين أنتاجه وتوزيعه بما يعطي الفرصة للمستهلك الحصول علي المنتج ويوفر في نفس الوقت الأرباح المعقولة للمنتجين.
نشأت قديما مشكلة بطلتها أسرة بالولايات المتحدة قمت الأم فيها بتسجيل رقصات لابنها الرضيع علي إحدي الأغنيات مما جعل الشركة المنتجة ترفع قضية ضد الأن لأنها رفعت المقطع علي موقع يوتيوب بدعوي أن الأم انتهكت حقوق ملكية الأغنية للشركة. وكانت هذه المشكلة واحدة من مشكلات عديدة أبرزت ضرورة إعادة النظر في قوانين الملكية الفكرية.

[Ted · Rating 4 out of 5]

Written in 2008, this book uses classic examples to illustrate how the government needs to lessen the regulations of copyrighting, specifically loosening restrictions on P2P (peer-to-peer) filesharing. A good read for those who are interested in government affairs and how it mixes with technology. I hope, though, the author writes a second edition version in the next years, especially with the advent of meme culture and the rapid growth of streaming and viral videos.

[Jonathan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Lessig, as usual, makes reasoned, well-thought out criticisms and suggestions for reform of the current copyright statutes in the United States. he is supportive of copyright, creators, and consumers. Unfortunately as long as the Citizens United decision stands, there is no hope of any of these suggestions or criticisms receiving any sort of a fair hearing on Capitol Hill.

[Haifa Alhamzah · Rating 3 out of 5]

Remix successfully explains and shows us that copyright is a grey area; that doesn’t need a black or white answer.

[Shulamith Farhi · Rating 5 out of 5]

There's a culture war going on. Our kids are the enemies. This is the peace treaty. Perhaps one day, people will realize Larry was right all along. It was never that confusing: ideas want to be free.

[kthread · Rating 3 out of 5]

Larry Lessig beckons us in his new book, Remix, to think about the future of a generation weaned on pirated media. In his usual elegant style, he clears the bramble around thorny issues of gift economies, fan labor (though he doesn't use the term), and what he calls the "Copyright Wars." (Here's video of the author reading the book's introduction.)

If you regularly read books in this genre you will recognize many of these examples; accordingly, Lessig works to reinvigorate the Potter Wars anecdote by focusing Warner Bros.'s continued waffle acknowledging profit margins from fan sites dedicated to Harry, Hermione, and the Weasley brood.

The young creator network that fought in the Potter War skirmishes are part of Lessig's most interesting argument: deregulating amateur creativity. The distilled argument begins chapter nine---the chapter that will appear on syllabi and circulate online (especially as it's a list, which bodes well for bookmark-sharing site Digg, and a list that ends with decriminalizing filesharing, a topic dear to Digg users)---and Lessig defines amateur creativity as different from professional creativity. A silly family video would be the former, the remix artist GirlTalk the latter, and he proposes flipping the model so a site host like YouTube absorbs responsibility for copyright fees in uploaded files instead of the user. Sexy, but I'm not convinced Big Brother aspires to be Daddy Warbucks.

Think of Clay Shirky's work on cognitive surpus and how he argues it was masked for decades ("Did you ever see that episode of Gilligan's Island where they almost get off the island and then Gilligan messes up and then they don't? I saw that one. I saw that one a lot when I was growing up.") and about how Shirky argues that the internet runs on love. Lessig teases out some (he could go further) of the legal usage implications of these production/consumption patterns--ceding that money pollutes gift economies, but pointing out absurd "user-generated content" sites for commercial entities like the Star Wars franchise that own the remixed fan products added to the "community" site.

On page 248 of Remix, he writes "the agreement between media companies, or media companies and artists, are not love letters. They do not express mutual respect." Lessig is not a copyright abolitionist--the movement concerns him greatly; neither does he promote filesharing (he responded to a filesharing question last night in this way). Respect for the laws governing copyright will work, he suggests, when the laws reflect the current culture (read his distinction between thin-sharing and thick-sharing). Without alteration, the regulations will continue to be ignored and this disregard may bleed into other areas of regulation, a dangerous trend for an entire generation.

At an event last night near Los Angeles, Lessig spoke on protecting use of amateur performance and the dangers of read-only societies.

And speaking of silly family videos, last week I posted a Thanksgiving dance clip, a Taylor tradition we now share with friends by posting online. As the cruise director of this particular family activity that was destined for YouTube, I made sure we used a remix of a Jackson 5 song, one I like better than the original spun by a Japanese DJ. We researched the original choreography on YouTube--the 1972 head bobs, the 1977 spinning Spaceship Earth moves. And instead of dubbing over, I left our voices and the scuffles of our shoes, adding a layer that adds value for the audience of this video: the small circle of family and friends who enjoy watching five white kids wear Afro wigs and dance around the garage.


I agree with Lessig that trying to live without the love of amateur remixers in an online world filled with video will be "one long sleepless night." Let's hope the new copyright czar will know wrong from right.

More Lessig on admins exercising judgment on video-sharing sites.

[Jeffrey · Rating 3 out of 5]

Lessig is a lawyer and law professor who has been at the forefront of questioning copyright controls in the digital age. He presents a number of ideas about how the internet, crowdsourcing, and artistic remixing are the modalities for economic and cultural development in the 21st century.

Unlike other books that I've read about the digital revolution,* Lessig comes down squarely on the side of technological innovation and all that it has spurred: presenting a picture of the internet as a vast frontier of fodder for art, music, activism, education, and altruism. His primary objective with Remix is to demonstrate why 20th century copyright law and the uncompromising definition of property serves neither company nor consumer in the 21st century.

In Lessig's "hybrid" economy consumers are not just consumers, they are empowered to take an active role in shaping and advancing the things they consume. Images, music, movies, text: all are easily rendered into binary and therefore easily mixed up (or mashed up, for those of you who prefer more contemporary lingo) into a potentially cross-cultural and interdisciplinary form of new creative expression. This "remixing" is taken on by the very people who formerly just bought such entertainment to be entertained. It is, in some ways, the ultimate triumph of fan fiction (just applied to every art form in addition to writing).

But Lessig isn't espousing a world where passive consumers simply become more active consumers and the wheels of the free market just fall into the fresher ruts formed by the digital world. Lessig believes that remix culture is a means by which democracy is enriched and ensured because it honors the way a new generation has learned to "write." As writing was fundamental to formulating our democracy (July 4th is ultimately about a written document, not beer or fireworks), democracy can only be ensured so long as a culture continues to be free to write. It's his definition of writing that is so intriguing:

Text is today's Latin. It is through text that we elites communicate . . . For the masses, however, most information is gathered through other forms of media: TV, film, music, and music video. These forms of "writing" are the vernacular of today. They are the kinds of "writing" that matters most to most. (68)

So, in my reading of Lessig's definition, it isn't an issue of the modern world becoming less text based so much as redefining what we mean by text. Like so much in contemporary life, access to more information and more context forces the critical mind to accept broader definitions for previously accepted ideas. At heart, that is a very democratic thing to do.

Whether or not you should read Lessig's book depends on your interest in contemporary culture or if you're in the profession of projecting business models into the future. It isn't a difficult text to read but it can be a bit dry and, for those of you who've subscribed to Wired magazine for the past ten years, you might be disappointed by the lack of material that hasn't already been a part of information-age-discourse. The most salient points in Remix center around the need for an updated approach to copyright law. As this is Lessig's area of expertise, it only makes sense that his best moments are devoted to the ways in which new forms of copyright could benefit both artist and audience. As a founding member of the Creative Commons he has already done much to prove that he practices what he preaches.

-----

* Such as Morris Berman's The Twilight of American Culture or Sven Birkert's Gutenberg Elegies: The Fate of Reading in an Electronic Age

[Alex Catalán Flores · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was introduced to Lawrence Lessig during Brett Gaylor's 2008 documentary RiP!: A Remix Manifesto, where Lessig provided some much-needed academic rigour to Gaylor's thesis on intellectual property and culture.

In that same year, Lessig published Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy. The book serves as an expansion and meticulous delineation of Lessig's thoughts provided in Gaylor's documentary, and it serves not as a call to arms as some have described it but rather as a careful appeal for social and legal reform of the restrictive intellectual property regime. The book is divided into three parts: Part I is an analysis of two cultural attitudes which he labels as Read/Only Culture (RO) and Read/Write Culture (RW). Lessig presents an interesting (albeit excessively simplistic at times) exposition of the underlying factors driving the cultural clash that took place with the advent of the internet. Whilst it would appear that Lessig is perpetuating the polarisation of the debate, Lessig stresses that 'the evidence promises an extraordinary synthesis' of these two cultures. He expertly explains how technology has fundamentally changed the manner in which we experience art, juxtaposing the structural differences between LPs and iTunes, for example, and conventional television and Netflix. He makes a convincing case that at the bottom of the debate the question is one of access. Our expectations of access have shifted significantly, whilst industry and political leaders have stayed behind.

Part II focuses on Economies, specifically what Lessig labels 'Sharing Economies' and 'Commercial Economies'. Admittedly, I was highly sceptical of Lessig's ability to discuss economics without a specific background in the discipline. It is always disappointing to read misinformed economic analysis that would have benefited from further research. Lessig, however, navigates the topic with great prowess. Again, Lessig writes about balance; about creating hybrid economies in which the legitimate profit-maximising interests of the industry are fulfilled in light of the nuanced requirements of the people who not only consume but also interact with the industry's products. What is fascinating about this part of the book is how true it rings today, 8 years since publication, particularly in the context of digital disruption and entrepreneurship.

Lessig finishes the book in Part III by discussing the ways in which we can enable the cooperation and co-existence of culture and commerce in the future. His legal analysis of intellectual property regulation is second to none, making a fiercely convincing case for law reform. In addition to the law, Lessig also writes about reforming our norms and expectations surrounding the control of culture. Most striking — considering his curiously silent race for the 2016 Democratic nomination — is his comment on the limitations of government regulation. Means are always subject to measure, Lessig writes, leaving for the reader some powerful final thoughts that reverberate to this day.

[Taylor · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this book, Lessig does not challenge that copyright is necessary to provide economic incentive for the creation of new works, but rather argues that copyright law has become outdated due to technological advancement. In framing his argument, he starts with the topic of music “piracy,” which, he claims, is rampant despite its illegality. His primary concern is that because this activity is so prevalent among the American youth, the outdated copyright law has created a nation of scofflaws. He finds it unnecessary to wage a war on piracy, when criminalizing the behavior has failed to deter the action in young people. The implication is that as young people begin to think of themselves as criminals, they will lose respect for the legal system and for intellectual property.

Lessig also argues that the current copyright system harms society by unnecessarily inhibiting creativity, stifling innovation, and missing economic opportunities for copyright holders. He uses computer technology as a metaphor for different types of creative cultures: Read-Only (RO) and Re-Write (RW) cultures. In an RO culture, products are produced and then consumed. In a RW culture, creative products are remixed to create further creative products.One of Lessig’s main arguments for how copyright law should be revised is to limit copyright regulation where RW culture flourishes. Lessig asserts that it is possible to not only have a better RO culture, but also a more vibrant RW culture and a flourishing world of hybrids.

Lessig’s overall points seem fairly convincing, but not always realistic. For instance, he proposes that the law should not allow (or require) copyright owners to police uses of their works in noncommercial instances. This, he claims, would enhance RW culture and would end lawsuits, or fear of lawsuits, against users whose use posed no economic threat to the copyright owner. In some instances, this may be highly undesirable for copyright owners, who may not want their creative work exploited, especially if the exploitation caused a work to be overexposed in the marketplace. While the nonprofit use may not have had an immediate negative effect on the market of the original, this overexposure may end up causing economic damages for which the copyright owner had no recourse. For instance, if a copyrighted song was used in an offensive video that went “viral,” the market for the original may be adversely affected if the copyright owner could not issue a takedown notice.

I liked his solution to change copyright to an “opt in” system after an initial period of automatic protection. This would be very effective in solving the orphan works problem, and, if all renewals were searchable in a database, would also result in a much clearer system for determining copyright status. As useful as this solution might be, I think it is very unlikely to actually occur, since there has been a lot of money put into litigating for extending copyright durations, not the other way around.

[Zerenus · Rating 4 out of 5]

I had high expectations for this book and was generally pleased to that end. I have known about Lawrence Lessig for awhile because of some involvement in past virtual communities he helped establish and because of his work in helping establish the Creative Commons, an alternate to standard copyright.

In the book Lessig argues that modern communication and information technology has reached a point where what was once an esoteric, highly expensive and exclusive set of activities (creating things videos, songs, interactive sites) has become "democratized"--in the sense that it is open to many to participate in. He distinguishes between what he calls "Read-Only" culture, or high culture/commercial culture containing movie producers, musicians, programmers, who create, license and sell their work and "Read-Write" culture, or amateur culture that involves individuals or small groups, sometimes making unique content sometimes "Remixing" content from RO (or RW). Pointing out the obvious, that RW culture is generally criminalized in the U.S. at least, he argues for ways that both cultures might thrive and feed into each other, through economic models like Google who share many of their resources but then rely on user data to build value into their services. He also makes a larger argument about copyright changes that on one hand balance copyright as a mechanism for allowing RO culture to invest into projects and profit (without giving them seemingly unending control they presently have) while on the other hand decriminalizing and promoting a stronger "Remix" culture, but I won't say more about that and instead encourage reading the book itself.

Sometimes Lessig does simplify things, like this discussion of economies, but I think this mostly has the effect of allowing him to expand his argument without spending an inordinate amount of time explaining the facets of this or that phenomena. Lessig's writing style is very approachable and enjoyable and I plan on picking up some of his other books after this one. Ultimately he puts forth an interesting argument and a potential way to bridge "RO" and "RW" that is worth reading through, especially for anyone interested in media and intellectual property "battles."

[Dave Lefevre · Rating 5 out of 5]

At the end of this book Lessig ends with a brief explanation of why our government acts irrational when it comes to copyright, education, war, and a slew of other items. To paraphrase, he says it's because our kids have less money to give to corporate campaigns than the RIAA, big oil, war profiteers, et al. I posit that if our system was sane right now, Lessig would be one of the top spokesmen for items like the legality of public expression on the net. He would be someone who would often show up on outlets like CNN to explain why we need to rethink copyright in an age of the Internet and how it's literally making whole forms of expression illegal for no good reason. Instead Lessig is a fringe figure that those of us that know about Free Software follow. In the age of the corporate media much of our country is now conditioned to think that copyright, file sharing, and the like is a simple black and white issue when its not. The rational arguments of Lessig, the Free Software movement, Open Source, and others never reach anyone's ears because the corporate media has a definite stance and they have no desire to present the other side.

The only slight markdown that Lessig gets is that he falls into the RIAA's trap by believing that if the RIAA companies get paid then artists get paid. This is a falsity that has gotten disproved time after time. Only the biggest artists make money in the record industry. Some artists never get paid because of legalities and some out and out are refused payment. This is a small point (so it thus doesn't mean it deserves a star off) but it comes up at the end of the book. Even very famous and successful artists like Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails fame have documented cases of the record companies stealing from them. So another reason to reform copyright that is missed by Lessig is to make sure artists get compensated because the argument that the RIAA companies take care of artists is bunk.

Here's hoping that we are only at the far end of a cycle and the mass political stupidity we're living through lightens up so we can have rational discussion about creativity. While it's not our number one priority it's importance is very high.

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

Lessig does it again, and does it better.

My Amazon.com review says it all, but here's what I'll say here:

What is completely new about Remix is that it finally and fully embraces the human context that was always present in Lessig's writing, but always subordinated to facts and arguments. In Remix it becomes clear that we can no longer dismiss his writings as "of the elite for the elite by the elite". More dramatically, and speaking as a father myself, I believe that the experience of fatherhood has fundamentally altered Lessig's perspective (for all our benefits) and focused the full power of his intellect on the question: how do the errors in our present legal constructs of copyright not only destroy the vitality of our culture and the value of our creative industries, but what are the consequences of finally and fully criminalizing the entire generation of Americans born after the birth of the VCR?

Lessig's thoughts move beyond argument to constructive advocacy: 5 positive reforms that can remedy what we "lefties" believe are a great travesty of law and free culture, potentially reverse what has become a precipitous decline in the value of the creative industries (movies, music, and recorded media especially), and most importantly, give our children the kind of rich cultural heritage that was the birthright of every American born before 1909. Moreover, these 5 positive reforms are expressed with a level of brevity simplicity that even a Congressperson can understand them.

Most provocative and encouraging to me is the way he marries the history of civil rights legislation (including the Civil Rights Act of 1964) to a possible way we could make copyright reform harmless and helpful to all concerned parties--the traditional rights holders in Hollywood and the creative remixers in Brooklyn. His synthesis of the legal mechanics of that great struggle with the great creative/cultural struggle in front of us is true genius.

[Chris · Rating 5 out of 5]

Remix represents my first book read on my nook. Needless to say, that fact was pretty symbolic for me. Someone who truly shares my visions and thoughts on culture and content. Lawrence Lessig brings a ton of common sense into the debate about Copyright and the 21st Century media remixes our society expects. This book did not disappoint.

He starts out by looking at these 21st Century children, referencing his own and of course I started to think of my own. But he says, in reference to how they use content, 'What does it mean to a society when a whole generation is raised as criminals?' Interesting choice of words and view, but Lessig is spot on by that question. Later in the book he receives some info of a 'pirate,' who indeed knows he does wrong, but that's just how he rolls, if you will.

Throughout the book, as in his public speeches, blogs, and other venues, he argues that we do need Copyright, but it needs to be changed. Later, in reference to this 'war,' he cites,' It is time we call a truce, and figure a better way.' And that's what he wants--a better way to fight Copyright infractions, while keeping creativity through the remixes alive. One of the points he made, that just blew me away, is the thought that through the 90s and 00s, how much money was spent on lawyer fees fighting this way. How much money was lost on lost cd sales. And then, how much money could have been generated if the RIAA, MPAA, and others changed their business plan.

That is really what we all think needs to happen. He references Warner and some other groups 'getting' it, by allowing the fan-fiction and other things, allowing for remixes, as the fans drive sales. Only then will we move on as a society, and only then will the 'industry' make money.

[Ben Bush]

Lessig's book is the first I've read regarding copyright that examines preferable alternatives to the current system: one that might reward artists and allow for collage-remix creativity. His alternate version of file-sharing sounded hopeful but was not fleshed out enough to seem totally believable. I think I would favor his proposed tax on digital technology that would be distributed to artists according to the frequency of their work being downloaded but wasn't entirely convinced it would work and seemed like it would require some serious technology-intensive overhaul current P2P systems. It seems Lessig's opponents often accuse him of either being a Communist or a craven Capitalist, but his perspectives often seemed almost Libertarian or leaning a little too hard on the wisdom of the free market. I would describe it as technophillic, but I guess we're all technophiles these days.

Overall, Lessig's goals seem totally admirable and he attempts them with a better than average degree of success. I would also recommend the book "Copyrights and Copywrongs" for readers interested in these issues.

[Justine · Rating 4 out of 5]

Larry Lessig offered me a very inspiring thought in his book, which is "The law is a way of speaking and thinking and, most important, an ethic. Every lawyer must feel responsible for the law he or she helps make ... the law is made as it is practiced. How it is made depends upon the values its practitioners share."

In Remix (published in 2008), he puts copyright and IP law into perspective vis a vis the digital age. Where laws are created without the anticipation that entirely new operating frameworks could supersede older ones (i.e. print vs. digital, 'professional authorship' vs. citizen reporting/content creation/sharing), then such laws ought really to be reviewed in new light. Mashups, audio remixes etc all present difficult questions to assertion of competing rights.

Think about it ... why do we compliantly credit rightful authors in our dissertations/papers in order to avoid plagiarism but not so when mashing up bits and pieces of music created by others? Isn't it strange that the immediate reaction is to launch into arguments of what's being used vs. whether something totally new has been created?

[Frank · Rating 4 out of 5]

Copyright and fair use have become confusing and confounding. Not only is it unclear today what exactly we can copy and create, but it seems incredulous that record companies and movie studios would resort to suing children.

In Remix, Lawrence Lessig cuts through the confusion and details how American copyright laws have ceased to perform their original role of protecting artistic creation and allowing artists to build on previous creative works. Today, Lessig contends, digital technologies make it as easy for media artists to remix, as it does for writers to quote from other sources. Unfortunately, such remixing is in violation of the current laws and creates a stifling climate for creativity.

Lessig stridently argues against the continuation of such a limited "read only" culture and suggests five major changes to our copyright laws:

1. Deregulation of amateur creativity
2. Opt-in copyright
3. Simplification of the copyright laws
4. Decriminalizing copying
5. Decriminalizing file sharing

Note: Remix, published in 2008, does not include any information about the purported looming Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement.

[Writerlibrarian · Rating 3 out of 5]

A clear and simple but not simplistic view of where copyrights law is doing to creativity, to innovation, to an entire generation of people who are 'pirates' by default.

The examples are dated, even if this was written in 2008. Digital content, technologies and how we interact, play, learn, create on this great universe of the Internet changes constantly but the basic principles of Lessig argument are interesting and do make clear that the Read Only industry has had its hour of glory and that the RW (Read Write) generation enabled by digital technologies will change the business models. It's inevitable. The RO industries will and are trying to delay the changes but at what price.

Food for thoughts, especially since reading it now with the distance of a few years and new business models emerging gives the reader a possible critical point of view of what has already happened, what is happening now and what the future of creative economy is shaping up to be.

[Jenny Thompson · Rating 4 out of 5]

What does it mean to turn an entire generation into criminals?

This is the essential question Lessig asks in his book, and I think it is a good one. I challenge you to find one person in my generation who has not in someway violated someone's copyright. I doubt you could do it.

Lessig argues that the current copyright system is broken, and it is actually hurting our society. He discusses many of the interesting ways that people have made something new out of copyrighted material. Personally, I know the section on Girl Talk made me smile.

I liked this book because of Lessig's style. The tone is very conversational, and witty little comments are hidden throughout the piece. It especially appealed to me, however, because Lessig actually likes my generation. He thinks we are interesting and creative. After reading Lanier last week, it was really nice to read a book by someone who looks at us and sees potential.