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