On Wed, 2005-08-17 at 13:03 +0200, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 02:33:29PM +0200, Alexandre Dulaunoy wrote:
I was thinking that the differentiation between functional and non-functional was easy. But working on various projects, I found that is not the case following the evolution of usage and distribution of "digital object".
It might be difficult, but that does not mean it cannot be done.
If we want to keep them free, the right of modification is very important...
I agree, but there are limit where the compromise in the other direction actually helps the freedom in the society.
The perfect compromise would be to say: "As long as you preserve the meaning you can modify the work to fit technical needs".
Except that we have a problem in defining both "meaning" and "technical", so to ease things we should try to simplify b categorizing things and proposing license for each category.
You to throw the motivations of the authors into the ring. Each bit of information needs to be written or assembled which is effrot. If we want quality works we need to compensate for this effort.
Are you sure? It's true that compensation give someone a chance to dedicate more time to a matter, but are you sure there's a direct link between compensation and quality?
I'd say no, the link is between motivation and skills, and quality. Now granted you have the right skills, in some cases compensation can be the right motivator. But compensation is not enough in most of the cases, and does not matte at all in many cases.
I remember an article that claimed that around in the French revolution, copyright was completely abandoned and the quality of publications went down significantly. Unfortunately I do not have the reference on this one. It was a few years ago.
Even if such data exist I would like to see how they have been put in relation to each other. What kind of measure for quality have been adopted, how the general economical and political status have been weighted and so on, it is to take to set of data and link them together through a time relation (they happened at the same time so they are linked), but timing is not enough to explain most facts.
I think that categories will help the process a lot more than burning all copy-rights on the same bonfire, like legislators tend to do.
I agree, oversimplification some times is bad.
To make realistic suggestions for the politicians, we need to accept that many people accept the idea of economic reward.
I do not see the link, under this line of reasoning you just advocate the status quo as that is accepted by most people ...
Simo.