Slashdot Mirror
An IP Environmentalism for Culture and Knowledge?
An anonymous reader writes "An article by James Boyle in the FT argues that we are (slowly) moving towards a 'cultural environmentalism' that tries to protect the public domain in the way that the environmental movement tries to protect the natural ecology. Apparently there will be a (free) conference at Stanford on the subject soon, organized by Larry Lessig's Center there."
I've never thought of it in quite that way... It really is a wonderful analogy... the only difference being that the 'IP-ecosystem' was created by us.
...and indeed both sides of the issue have been polarized in nearly the same ways.... the "whacko environmental extremists" and "evil big business" who will destroy anything in the path towards profit.
Is this dichotomy a natural progression of such issues or is it truely the way things are.
I know what I believe...and I've picked my side.
~Dan
Please understand that true conservatives are all about protecting the environment. They support short terms on copyrights and patents. Why do they support such things? Because the represent responsibility and liberty, and that's what true conservatism is all about.
In the US, those who seek to put in place legislation that allows companies to harm the environment, or extend copyright terms, and so forth, are not conservatives, libertarians, nor are they liberals. They are Republicans and Democrats. We may essentially consider the Democrats and Republicans to be one and the same, even if they project the image of being "opponents". They're both financed by the largest corporations and wealthiest few individuals in the US and the world. They have very little incentive to do what's best for the average American.
So when a self-proclaimed "conservative" rags on you about your support for limiting environmental damage or unnecessarily long copyright terms, just remember that he or she is in no way a conservative. In fact, such an individual stands firmly against conservatism.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Just shorten it to "free-hugger."
Darned free-hugging IPpies.
This tagline is copyrighted material. Please send $10 for an affordable replacement.
See section V.
I'm sure they tried very very hard to create a feel-good phrase but "cultural environmentalism" doesn't work. Ecological environmentalism seeks to prevent any human-made effects in ecological systems -- preventing any human-made changes to pristine ecologies and removing the effects of humans from sullied ecologies. The true parallel that could be considered "cultural environmentalism" might include splitting or censoring the internet to prevent the flow of "deleterious" culture from one country to another (just like the USDA tries to regulate the import for foriegn plants and animals). Some of the issues raised by Islamic fundamentalism might be true examples of cultural environmentalism in that they seek to avoid pollution from western cultures. The point is that China and Bin Laden are doing more for true "cultural environmentalism" than are Lessig and crew.
This version of "cultural environmentalism" is less about prevention of change or pollution of cultures by "bad" cultural influences and more of an economic fight about who pays and who does for so-called "cultural" properties. Lessig et al have only made use of a positive buzzword.
Its just another example of co-opting a word for its connotations, not its true meaning (like calling every act of violence or non-patriotic idea a "terrorist" threat).
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.