Slashdot

I just signed up with youtube and put up a few videos. (Under a CC BY-SA license.)

I searched for copyleft to see what other copyleft works were on there and found a lot of works tagged or otherwise marked as copyleft but with explanations indicating that they were not actually copyleft.

I am going to try and document Free, Open, and Copyleft confusions as I find them out in the wild. I invite you to join in if you wish.

-----
Copyleft explained:

http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft

-----
Youtube examples:

Found with a copyleft search on youtube but this is not copyleft:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qItNmoBl5lE (
Copyleft - Creative Commons Deed:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/1.0/
The NC here makes this not copyleft.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJIG5OjKcVU
"Multiracial Alliance Building Peace Conference and is 100% copyleft and
non-copyrighted so we encourage people to duplicate it and circulate it around
the world!"
Claims to be copyleft and non-copyrighted at the same time. If it is public domain, it can't be copyleft. What is really meant?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_q2HFkAIbjo
Tggged: copyleft.
site: http://www.cincinman.info/index.html
"Cin Cin Man" was COPYRIGHTED and promptly COPYLEFTED (anybody is free to use it, improve, change, mutilate, but with NO commercial purposes/ www.creativecommons.org).
No commercial purposes means this is not copyleft.

-----

drew

Here are some thoughts for your consideration:

1. All 'non'marked' works get an automatic copyleft, not an automatic copyright.

2. Copyleft works can be registered for free, copyright works incurr a registration fee.

3. There is a yearly copyright tax imposed on copyright works, copyleft works are exempt.

4. The copyright tax is based on a percentage of the copyright holder declared value of the work.

5. The copyright holder will be encouraged to declare an honest value by having to sell the copyright to to work at the declared value or 5 percent above that value to any and all comers. At the value if the purchaser will put the work under a copyleft, 5 percent above if the purchaser will keep the work copyright.

6. Copyright status lasts for 10 years, then the works convert to copyleft for another ten then they go into the public domain.

7. Orignally copyleft works remain copyleft for the life of the author (and perhaps plys whatever.)

8. Works building on public domain works are not elegible for copyright status, only copyleft. (Does this make any practical sense??)

all the best,

drew

RIAAHMC: So, Joe Suka, just sign here and you can have the money and get started building your new home today.

Joe: Uh.

RIAAHMC: Is there a problem?

Joe: Um, I am not sure, I am a little confused.

RIAAHMC: What is to be confused about, this is our standard contract. Everyone signs it. It is really very simple.

Joe: Well, what I don't get is that you lend me the money to build my house.

RIAAHMC: Right.

Joe: And then I have to pay you back the money you loaned me.

RIAAHMC: Right, that is standard.

Joe: And then after I have paid you back, you own the house and not me?

RIAAHMC: Sure, that's how we do it! It's standard.

Joe: I think I am gonna try one of them intarweb home mortgage companies. I heard that when banks compete, I win. Almost anything has to be better than this.

Look like the original was posted March 24/05 - this edit is August 16/05:

Well, it looks like that idea went over like a lead balloon.

If it does not get some reasonable response soon, it will be consigned to the bit shredder.

-----
I suggest those of us who support copyleft or other free programs/culture place "Money where my mouth is links" in our posts or sigs.

See:

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=143084&threshold=0&commentsort=0&tid=103&mode=thread&cid=12041734

These would be links to some (even minor) example of our support.

I don't mean this as a means of tooting your own horn but rather as a means of getting to know a bit more about those we are discoursing with right in the posts themselves.

drew

Can we figure a way to give "jail" time for corporations convicted of crimes that would send humans to jail?

OK, corporation not allowed to do business while in "jail." (Except where human would be allowed to carry on business from jail.

Objection: Employees will suffer.

Possible fix...

Employees, except those guilty of the crime keep runnig the company. They get their pay. All profits go to government to make good victims. First of the corporation/crime, then of other crimes.

Problems?

I mean, why should a human face fines and jail time if they violate the copyrights of a corporation when a coproration only faces fines when it violates the copyrights of a human? What happened to equal protection under the law? (Is that the correct term?)

all the best,

drew