[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A Little Linguistic Playground

Hi David and others,

I too have been playing with this type of concept. 

Any copyright discussion needs to start with public domain, of course, and
"copyleft" too. Then go on to decopyright.

I do not agree that Public Domain is NOT intuitive. If there is an
ignorance issue, then educate. We should wage a war in this area, and soon
everyone will understand the basics.

The term and signal that I've been thinking upon might be used is:
(Call) as differ from (C)  --> The copyright "C" in a circle with the year
The (Call) is a Capital C and the word "all" -- so the copyright is owned
by "all." And as a little linguistic playground, I'd like to call that a
"civility" license.

The civility part is to say, use my words/collections/ideas and such to
advance the common good, but not to rape the creator. If I put a poem or
short story into the world as a (Call) work, I'd not like to see that as a
Disney movie without a check in the mail.
To me, copyleft is not copyright, but it is also tainted. Tainting is
something that is important to understand too. Once it is tainted, it
always is tainted. So, a work can be put into the "free" license, but it
can not be included in any "not-free" products. Proprietary is a good word
to make sure everyone understands as well.
The other hidden agenda that comes with the (Call) is the word "call."
There is much to be said about a "call." In this context, think 40-days
and 40-nights in a desert. One is called by the spirits/dream/society. It
is gut-check-time, and you are called to battle (a hot one now no doubt).
Call and duty go hand in hand. My pal, Kevin DeForrest, writes about the
first call -- like to sports as a young athlete. And then the second call
-- to return to sports and to help society (such as to coach, teach, aid).
Often, it is those in life that hear and respond to the second call that
that can make a huge difference in peace and greater understandings.
Much of this is talked about in the FREE & OPEN software movement that is
happening. I'd like to see this movement spread far and wide -- FREEly and
OPENly. =;0 A transition to books, to movies, to term papers, to corporate
policies and to schools is okay by me.
Mark Rauterkus                                                                  
Swimming upward to a FREE & OPEN info, access and tools for technology!         
>If one desires to put his/her work in the public domain, he has to write
>a statement to effectuate it such as "I put this essay in the public
>domain".  This is fine for most people but the term "public domain" is
>not intuitive because it does not resemble the term "copyright" in any
>way.  Therefore, I propose a new word called "decopyright".  It means to
>deprive a work of the copyright. 
>Several examples of the usage on the word:
>     I decopyright this essay.
>     (A librarian speaking to a patron.)  Several decopyrighted books 
>     have arrived yesterday and you may want to borrow them today.
>     (On the copyright page inside a book)
>               Copyright 1999 by John Smith
>              Decopyright 2005 by John Smith
>     Unless it is decopyrighted, you have to ask the author for 
>     permission.
>     My friend sometimes is a decopyrighter.
>     Anything that is copyrightable is also decopyrightable.
>I did a brief search at http://www.dejanews.com/ and found that there
>was a post using the word "decopyright".  http://www.nlsearch.com/ and
>http://www.altavista.digital.com/ also yielded several results but all
>of them are in French and German languages.  I do not know what
>"decopyright" would mean in these languages. 
>Well, what do you think?