From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 09:51:30 -0400

I think Jim correctly describes the real problem (the spirit behind
the letter) and Kevin Smith has the first part of a solution.  It is
one thing for the owners of intellectual property to take a
conservative view of their rights (and for the most part, I would
agree with them), quite another to conceal their point of view (which
can, of course, always be challenged), thereby trapping some people
into crossing a line.  But draw the line, please, so that people know
when they are crossing it.

I would like to see every piece of IP published along with its
authorized rights.  Thus you could purchase the ebook of a Harry
Potter novel and learn that you can write fan fiction (new stories
based on the characters) provided that you don't charge money for
them.  Or you could purchase a U. press monograph and learn that you
can use it for classroom use for $10--click here to consummate the
license.  Nothing will ever totally eliminate piracy, but making
things easy to work with reduces piracy.

There are two organizations that could develop programs in this area:
CCC and Creative Commons (CC).  (CCC has one more C because it's half
again as valuable as CC.)  But I don't see any business development
energy from either of these organizations in directions that would
effect the actual use of material.  Please tell me that I am wrong.

Joe Esposito

On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 8:08 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Jim O'Donnell <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 21:33:25 -0400
>
> Thanks to numerous posters and point taken about the difference of
> trademark, which is indeed a different zone.  I think my point
> remains:  there's what you do and there's how you do it.  Doing what
> you have to do to enforce rights is one thing, but displaying that you
> get it and persuading the public that you are citizenly not predatory
> is always in your power.
>
> Jim O'Donnell