Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

EFF Chairman Interviewed

Posted by michael on from the two-fer dept.

mpawlo writes "I have just published an interview with Mr Brad Templeton, chairman of the board of the EFF, over at Greplaw. Mr Templeton presents, among other things, his view on spam and freedom of speech among. If that's not enough, there is also a rather unique tongue-in-cheek interview with Professor Lessig."

5 of 104 comments (clear)

  1. Maybe he could explain what they actually do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I donated about a $100 per year to EFF foundation before, but I will stop the practice this year. I am not sure what the goal of the foundation and how it helps the simple folk anymore.

    A friend of mine lived in Germany and was harassed by the local hand of IFPI, which I guess would correspond to RIAA over here. All I wanted from EFF was a simple consultation on what should be done. Specifically since the German IFPI wanted a $300 fine not to take the matter to the court.

    Two e-mails to EFF from their contact page and dead silence, as if you're e-mailing a black hole. If I had not donated $300 to EFF in years before but just gave the money to my friend to pay the fine, I'd be better off.

  2. USENET not stagnant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    even though USENET has stagnated and not added much new since the 80s, it's still the best way to read an online conversation. None of the web message boards come even close to the speed and ease of use.

    USENET has not stagnated. Not much has been added since the 80s because nothing more was needed. Even with all this p2p nonsense, USENET continues in its near-perfect simplicity and utility. If you're one of these puckered-rectum FAQ Nazis, USENET is chaos. If you're willing to do due diligence of your own filtering and scanning, USENET consistently delivers great text info and binaries.

  3. Balance of copyright by Magic+Thread · · Score: 4, Interesting
    From the Lessig interview:
    # Speaking of copyright - what would a Lessig balance of copyright look like? Would you regulate books and computer programs different?

    Deposit requirement.
    Registration requirement.
    Anyone else think these two are unreasonable? They deal no harm to huge corporations of the kind that now own our culture, but they would be a major obstacle to people who just want to make stuff. If I had to go fill out forms and spend money every time I wrote an article or composed a song, I would do much less of those things.
    1. Re:Balance of copyright by RevMike · · Score: 5, Interesting
      >>Deposit requirement.

      >>Registration requirement.

      Anyone else think these two are unreasonable? They deal no harm to huge corporations of the kind that now own our culture, but they would be a major obstacle to people who just want to make stuff. If I had to go fill out forms and spend money every time I wrote an article or composed a song, I would do much less of those things.

      It depends alot on how difficult it is to register your work. If it was a simple and free web form/ftp to the library of congress, probably not big deal (to us - there would need to be methods for the non-computer literate as well).

      If you needed to spend $10, you probably wouldn't bother with some things.

      If you needed to spend $1000, well, that would really suck and would stifle creativity.

      As a major side benefit, all the works would automatically be freely available from a set of libraries as soon as the copyrights expired.

  4. Re:spam and copyright laws by RevMike · · Score: 4, Interesting
    >>No copyright protection at all for any software whose source code is not deposited.

    This struck me as reasonable. Either I trust the government to keep my stuff safe, or I try to keep it safe myself. It's when I try to keep it safe myself, yet task the government with going after anyone I say is using my stuff, that things get sticky... I could use the government to try to stop competition.

    I agree as well, although the 10 years might be a little steep for software. Patents should probably be thrown into the mix as well, with a graduated expiration based on the area of knowledge. Business Process patents would be very short - 3 years. Software patents would run about 7, perhaps. Things like pharmacueticals, with tremendous R&D costs, would still get protection for about 20 years.

    The other issue with copyright I'd like to see addressed is "continuous use". My idea is that certain types of copyrighted work would continue to be protected provided that it was in continual use. For instance, since Disney continues to use the Mickey Mouse character on an ongoing basis, Mickey Mouse works continue to be covered by copyright. Ian Flemming's James Bond character also would be covered since every few years a new movie is released. Once a work is "abandoned" - not used for perhaps 5 years, however, a clock starts ticking for a copyright expiration in, say, 15 years rather than 75.

    Taking a traditional Locke property view of copyrights: As long as a farmer is continuing to till his soil every season, there is no reson to take the farm away from him. Once he abandons his farm, perhaps because he can't till it profitably, others should have a chance to give it a try.