Watch videos with subtitles in your language, upload your videos, create your own subtitles! Click here to learn more on "how to Dotsub"

Annotated captions of Lawrence Lessig's WIPO keynote (Nov. 4, 2010) no pictures in English

Last Modified By Time Content
calmansi 00:03
00:06

So I want to start with the words of Jessica Litman

calmansi 00:06
00:09

who in 1994 wrote this in an article titled

calmansi 00:09
00:12

"The Exclusive Right to Read".

calmansi 00:12
00:16

Jessica wrote: "At the turn of the century,

calmansi 00:16
00:19

U.S: copyright law was technical, inconsistent

calmansi 00:19
00:22

and difficult to understand,

calmansi 00:22
00:26

but it didn't apply to very many people or very many things."

calmansi 00:26
00:30

"If one were an author or publisher of books.

calmansi 00:30
00:33

maps, charts, paintings, sculpture, photographs or sheet music,

calmansi 00:33
00:35

a playwright or producer of plays, or a printer,

calmansi 00:36
00:39

the copyright law bore on one's business."

calmansi 00:40
00:46

"Booksellers, piano-rolls and phonograph record publishers, motion picture producers,

calmansi 00:46
00:50

musicians, scholars, members of Congress, and ordinary citizens

calmansi 00:50
00:53

however could go about their business without ever

calmansi 00:53
00:56

encountering a copyright problem."

calmansi 00:56
01:05

"90 years later, the U.S: © law is even more technical, inconsistent and difficult to understand;

calmansi 01:05
01:10

more importantly, it touches everone and everything."

calmansi 01:11
01:16

"Technology, heedless of law, has developed modes

calmansi 01:16
01:20

that insert multiple acts of reproduction and transmission

calmansi 01:20
01:28

- potentially actionable events under the © statute - into commonplace daily transactions.

calmansi 01:28
01:36

"Most of us can no longer spend even an hour without colliding with the © law."

calmansi 01:41
01:47

In 1906, this man, John Philip Souza, traveled to this place, the US Congress,

calmansi 01:47
01:51

to talk about this technology, which he called the "talking machines".

calmansi 01:51
01:56

Souza was not a fan of the talking machines.

calmansi 01:56
02:01

This is what he had to say: "These talking machines are going to ruin

calmansi 02:01
02:04

the artistic development of music in this country.

calmansi 02:04
02:08

When I was a boy... in front of every house in the summer evenings

calmansi 02:08
02:12

you would find youg people together, singing the songs of the day or the old songs.

calmansi 02:12
02:18

Today, you hear these infernal machines going night and day.

calmansi 02:18
02:22

We will not have a vocal chord left" Souza said

calmansi 02:22
02:25

"The vocal chords will be eliminated by a process of evolution,

calmansi 02:25
02:30

as was the tail of man when he came from the ape."

calmansi 02:30
02:35

Now this is the picture I want you to focus on, this picture of young people together

calmansi 02:35
02:38

singing the songs of the day or the old songs.

calmansi 02:38
02:43

This is a picture of cultureP We could call it, using modern computer terminology,

calmansi 02:43
02:46

a kind of read-write culture.

calmansi 02:46
02:52

It's a culture where people participate in the creation and re-creation of their culture,

calmansi 02:52
02:58

in that sense, it's read-write. And Souza's fear was that we'd lose the capacity

calmansi 02:58
03:03

to engage in this read-write creativity because of these "infernal machines".

calmansi 03:03
03:08

They would take it away, displace it, and in its place we'd have the opposite

calmansi 03:08
03:13

of read-write creativity, what we could call, using modern computer terminology,

calmansi 03:13
03:16

a kind of read-only culture.

calmansi 03:16
03:22

A culture where creativity is consumed, but the consumer is not a creator.

calmansi 03:22
03:25

A culture, in this sense, that's top-down,

calmansi 03:25
03:30

where the vocal cords of the millions of ordinary people have been lost.

calmansi 03:31
03:35

Now if you look back at culture in the 20th century

calmansi 03:36
03:38

at least in what we call "the developed world",

calmansi 03:38
03:42

it's hard not to conclude that John Philip Souza was right.

calmansi 03:43
03:46

Never before in the history of human culture

calmansi 03:46
03:48

had its production become as concentrated.

calmansi 03:48
03:51

Never before had it become as professionalized.

calmansi 03:52
03:57

Never before had the creativity of ordinary creators been as effectively displaced

calmansi 03:57
04:01

and displaced, as he said, because of these "Infernal machines".

calmansi 04:01
04:06

A technology - a technology of broadcasting and vinyl records

calmansi 04:07
04:10

had produced this passive, consuming culture.

calmansi 04:10
04:13

It's a technology that enabled efficient consumption

calmansi 04:13
04:18

- what we could call "reading" - but inefficient at least what we'd call

calmansi 04:18
04:22

amateur production - what I want to call "writing".

calmansi 04:22
04:28

It was a great culture for listening, not so great technology for speaking;

calmansi 04:28
04:34

a great technology for writing, not a great technology for democratic creation.

calmansi 04:34
04:39

The 20th century was this unique century in the history of human culture

calmansi 04:39
04:42

where culture had become "read only",

calmansi 04:42
04:48

against a background of read/write creativity since the beginning of human culture.

calmansi 04:48
04:53

OK, that's here our introduction to an argument I want to make here today.

calmansi 04:53
04:58

And the argument invokes an idea that my friend and colleague Jamie Boyle

calmansi 04:58
05:01

has been speaking of for more than a decade.

calmansi 05:01
05:07

So this Idea is that we recognize first that creativity happens within an ecology.

calmansi 05:07
05:13

An ecology, an environment that sets the conditions of exchange.

calmansi 05:13
05:19

And number 2 these ecologies are importantly different.

calmansi 05:19
05:24

There are different ecologies of creativity.

calmansi 05:24
05:30

Some of these ecologies have money at the core

calmansi 05:30
05:34

Others don't have money at the core.

calmansi 05:34
05:40

And some have money and practices that don't depend upon money

calmansi 05:40
05:44

right at the core. They are different ecologies of creativity.

calmansi 05:44
05:48

So think about the professional ecologies of creativity,

calmansi 05:48
05:54

ecologies that the Beatles or Dylan or John Philip Souza created for.

calmansi 05:54
05:59

For these ecologies the control of the creativity is imposrtant

calmansi 05:59
06:04

to assure the necessary compensation that the artist needs

calmansi 06:04
06:07

to create the incentives for that artist to create.

calmansi 06:07
06:11

In these professional ecologies, these ecologies depend upon

calmansi 06:11
06:15

an effective and efficient system of copyright.

calmansi 06:15
06:20

But in what we could call an amateur ecology of creativity

calmansi 06:20
06:25

by which I don't mean amateurish, In stead I mean an ecology

calmansi 06:25
06:28

where the creator creates for the love of the creativity

calmansi 06:28
06:33

and not for the money. In that kind of ecology,

calmansi 06:33
06:38

an ecology that lives within what we could call, following Yochai Benkler,

calmansi 06:38
06:44

the sharing economy. That's the economy that children live within

calmansi 06:44
06:48

or friends live within, or lovers live within -

calmansi 06:48
06:51

in those kinds of economies, for these -

calmansi 06:51
06:55

people don't use money to express value

calmansi 06:55
07:00

and to set the terms of their exchange.

calmansi 07:00
07:05

Indeed if you introduced money into those sharing economies,

calmansi 07:05
07:09

you would radically change the character of those economies.

calmansi 07:09
07:14

So imagine friends, inviting the other for lunch the following week

calmansi 07:14
07:17

and the answer is "Sure, how about for 50 bucks?"

calmansi 07:17
07:22

Or imagine dropping money right in the middle of this kind of relarionship

calmansi 07:22
07:25

we radically transform it into something very different.

calmansi 07:26
07:31

The point is to recognize how creativity in many contexts,

calmansi 07:31
07:34

in the context Souza was romanticizing,

calmansi 07:34
07:38

is a creativity that exists outside of an economy of cash.

calmansi 07:38
07:44

In this sense, this amateur ecology depends not upon control

calmansi 07:44
07:50

and copyright, but instead depends upon this opportunity for free use and sharing.

calmansi 07:50
07:55

And then finally, think about the scientific ecology

calmansi 07:55
08:00

of creativity, of the scientist, or the educator, or the scholar.

calmansi 08:00
08:03

There's a very interesting picture here, this 16th century scholar

calmansi 08:03
08:06

notice the kind of guilty look on his face. And look down

calmansi 08:06
08:10

and see exactly what he's doing: he's copying from that book.

calmansi 08:10
08:14

He's just a pirate from long ago this scholar here, right?

calmansi 08:14
08:18

because of course, scholarship is and has always been this activity

calmansi 08:18
08:23

of creating within a mixed economy of free and paid

calmansi 08:23
08:28

A creator here has a love for his or her creativity,

calmansi 08:28
08:32

a love that exceeds how much she or he is paid.

calmansi 08:32
08:39

But it's that economy that defines the mixed ecology of scientific knowledge.

calmansi 08:39
08:43

This ecology depends not upon exclusive control, but

calmansi 08:43
08:49

but both on free and fair use of creative work that is built upon

calmansi 08:49
08:54

and then spread. Now, the key here is to recognize that these ecologies

calmansi 08:54
08:59

coexist. They complement each other.

calmansi 08:59
09:07

And here is the critical point: a copyright system must support

calmansi 09:07
09:13

each of these separate ecologies. It's not enough for it to support one

calmansi 09:13
09:18

and destroy the others. It must support each of them, it must

calmansi 09:18
09:21

support the professional ecology of creativity,

calmansi 09:21
09:24

through adequate and sufficient incentives.

calmansi 09:25
09:29

But it must also support the amateur and scientific ecologies of creativity

calmansi 09:29
09:32

through essential freedoms that they depend upon.

calmansi 09:32
09:37

Or again, more graphically, copyright needs to do two things, not just one.

calmansi 09:37
09:42

It needs to provide the incentives that the professionals

calmansi 09:42
09:48

need by protecting the freedoms that the amateur and scientific creations need.

calmansi 09:48
09:58

So these ecologies change. Technologies change them,

calmansi 09:58
10:00

technologies of broadcasting and vinyl changed them

calmansi 10:01
10:04

in a way that Souza feared. Government change them.

calmansi 10:04
10:07

Think about the Chinese government's relationship

calmansi 10:08
10:11

to the Tibetan cultural heritage.

calmansi 10:11
10:20

Economics changes them. So in the 18th century opera was king

calmansi 10:20
10:25

and singers were troubadours. In the 20th century the economics had made

calmansi 10:25
10:28

the troubadours kings and opera fell into increasing disuse.

calmansi 10:28
10:37

These ecologies change, and interestingly and obviously the Internet

calmansi 10:37
10:42

has changed them dramatically, has changed professional

calmansi 10:42
10:47

ecologies of creativity through technologies like Napster

calmansi 10:47
10:50

or Apple and their iTunes music store, producing radically

calmansi 10:50
10:56

new markets, and radical increase in the diversity of culture that is accessible,

calmansi 10:56
11:00

the opportunity to buy and consume culture produced

calmansi 11:00
11:07

anywhere and in any form, is the opportunity that this digital culture

calmansi 11:07
11:12

for this form of creativity has produced.

calmansi 11:12
11:16

In the scientific context,we've seen a dramatic change

calmansi 11:16
11:20

in the way in which scientific knowledge gets produced and shared

calmansi 11:20
11:25

through extraordinary listservs that facilitate immediate

calmansi 11:25
11:29

spread of knowledge in certain fields to free publications

calmansi 11:29
11:32

like the Public library of science, which assures free access

calmansi 11:32
11:36

to the underlying work perpetually, to an increasing spread of

calmansi 11:36
11:40

even blog structures producing a radical new opportunity

calmansi 11:40
11:44

to spread these ideas broadly. And in the amateur culture,

calmansi 11:44
11:50

we've seen an explosion through platforms such as YouTube

calmansi 11:50
11:55

of what I want to call a kind of call and response culture

calmansi 11:55
12:00

that has revived thre read/write culture fundamentally.

calmansi 12:01
12:03

So I want to give you some examples of this,

calmansi 12:03
12:06

So we just have a clear sense of what I'm talking about.

calmansi 12:06
12:07

Everybody knows this -

calmansi 12:10
12:14

(music) piece of work by Pachelbel, canon in D?

calmansi 12:16
12:24

A teenager, sitting in his room, [name not understood], remixed it then.

calmansi 12:24
12:31

(remixed music)

calmansi 12:31
12:37

79 million people have watched this remix

calmansi 12:38
12:42

and more fundamentally for me, as 79 million people have watched it,

calmansi 12:42
12:48

more than 2600 people have reinterpreted it,like this

calmansi 12:48
12:53

writing their own version for other people to view from YouTube.

calmansi 12:53
12:56

Or here's another example- This video:

calmansi 12:57
13:11

(video)

calmansi 13:11
13:14

that inspired somebody to produce this video:

calmansi 13:28
13:31

which then inspired somebody to produce this video:

calmansi 13:47
13:51

Here is one more example.So everybody should know the Brad Pack

calmansi 13:51
13:58

which was a collection of actors who performed first in the Breakfast Club

calmansi 13:58
14:03

And the Brad Pack was an inspiration to a certain culture,

calmansi 14:03
14:09

certain generation. And the song Listomania, produced by the group Phoenix

calmansi 14:09
14:14

has become a certain cultural icon to a generation.

calmansi 14:14
14:17

So somebody decided they would take the video from

calmansi 14:17
14:23

the Breakfast Club and remix it and create a music video

calmansi 14:23
14:26

for Listomania. And this is what they produced:

calmansi 14:35
14:42

So recognize, this is just re-editing the underlying movements, setting it to music

calmansi 14:42
14:57

And then somebody got the idea that they ought to create (...) of exactly this. So

calmansi 14:57
15:00

Brooklyn decided he would be first,

calmansi 15:28
15:32

And of course not to be outdone, San Francisco decided it would be next

calmansi 15:58
16:06

And another (...) scores of these on YouTube, from cities around the world (?)

calmansi 16:06
16:11

as people reinterpret the same original scores and create

calmansi 16:11
16:16

in this amateur ecology of creativity, their own version.

calmansi 16:16
16:20

which they then share and inspire others to create (...)

calmansi 16:20
16:23

This is what I refer to as remix. But what I want you to recognize

calmansi 16:23
16:27

is that it is what Souza was romanticizing

calmansi 16:27
16:31

when he spoke of young people getting together and singing the songs

calmansi 16:31
16:34

of the day or the old songs. But today, that getting together

calmansi 16:34
16:39

is not in the backyard, it is through this free digital platform

calmansi 16:39
16:42

that encourages people from around the world to participate

calmansi 16:42
16:46

in this act of cultural reinterpretation and share it

calmansi 16:46
16:51

in an ecology that does not trade on money, but an ecology

calmansi 16:51
16:54

that instead trades upon this activity of sharing.

calmansi 16:55
16:57

The internet has changed these 3 ecologies of creativity.

calmansi 16:57
17:02

But the question that this organisation needs to address is,

calmansi 17:02
17:07

has copyright kept up with the change in these ecologies?

calmansi 17:07
17:11

Has it kept up with the changes as they have affected

calmansi 17:11
17:16

these 3 ecologies? Now my own view of the answer to this question

calmansi 17:16
17:18

is quite simple: it has not

calmansi 17:18
17:24

It has failed. It has failed to assure the adequate incentives

calmansi 17:24
17:28

in the professional culture, and it has failed to protect

calmansi 17:28
17:33

the necessary freedoms in the amateur and critical or scientific culture.

calmansi 17:33
17:38

It has failed at both of its objectives and its failure is not

calmansi 17:38
17:45

an accident. Its failure is an implication of the architecture

calmansi 17:45
17:47

of copyright as we inherited it.

calmansi 17:47
17:52

This architecture makes no sense in the context of the digital environment.

calmansi 17:52
17:57

The architecture, which triggers the application of copyright law

calmansi 17:57
18:00

upon the production of a copy, in a digital environment

calmansi 18:00
18:07

makes no sense. It regulates too much, and it regulates too poorly.

calmansi 18:07
18:10

So think of a simple example of a book in physical space.

calmansi 18:10
18:13

If these are all the uses of a book in physical space,

calmansi 18:13
18:17

an important set of these uses are just technically unregulated

calmansi 18:17
18:20

by the law of copyright in physical in physical space.

calmansi 18:20
18:22

So to read a book is not a fair use of the book,

calmansi 18:22
18:26

it's a free use of the book, because to read a book is not to produce a copy.

calmansi 18:26
18:29

To give someone a book is not a fair use of the book,

calmansi 18:29
18:32

it's a free use of the book, because to give someone a book is not to produce a copy.

calmansi 18:32
18:35

To sell a book is explicitly exempted from the reach of © law

calmansi 18:35
18:38

in many jurisdictions, including the United States,

calmansi 18:38
18:40

because to sell a book is not to produce a copy.

calmansi 18:40
18:43

In no jurisdiction in the world is sleeping on a book a regulated act

calmansi 18:43
18:45

because to sleep on a book is not to produce a copy.

calmansi 18:45
18:52

These unregulated acts are then balanced by a set of necessary regulated acts,

calmansi 18:52
18:56

necessary to create the proper incentives to produce great new works.

calmansi 18:56
19:00

And then in the American tradition, there is a thin sliver of exceptions,

calmansi 19:00
19:03

acts that otherwise would have been regulated by the law

calmansi 19:03
19:06

but which the law says are to remain free

calmansi 19:06
19:09

so that culture can build upon those creative works

calmansi 19:09
19:12

in a way unhampered by the law. Enter the internet,

calmansi 19:12
19:16

where because a digital platform, every single use

calmansi 19:17
19:22

produces a copy. And we go from this balance of unregulated and regulated

calmansi 19:22
19:27

and fair uses, to a presumptively regulated use for every single use,

calmansi 19:27
19:30

merely because the platform through which we get

calmansi 19:30
19:33

access to our culture has changed. This is the consquence

calmansi 19:33
19:40

of an architecture, an architecture of copyright law, an architecture of digital technologies.

calmansi 19:40
19:42

It is that architecture that produced what Jessica spoke of

calmansi 19:42
19:46

when she said, "a world where we can't even go for an hour

calmansi 19:46
19:51

without colliding with copyright law", and the collision is a problem

calmansi 19:51
19:56

not with some generation that can't learn to respect the rules,

calmansi 19:56
20:01

it is a problem in the design of this system of regulation.

calmansi 20:03
20:11

Now 15 years into this revolution, where we're waging war

calmansi 20:11
20:14

- well, in the US we waged many wars, but the particular war here is the

calmansi 20:14
20:20

copyright wars - against the implications of this new technology,

calmansi 20:20
20:23

a war which my friend, the late Jack Valenti, former head of the

calmansi 20:23
20:27

Motion Pictures Association of America refered to as

calmansi 20:27
20:33

as his own "terrorist war", where apparently the terrorists in this war

calmansi 20:33
20:42

are our children, 15 years into this terrorist war, we need finally to recognize

calmansi 20:42
20:46

the failing, not of our kids, but of this architecture.

calmansi 20:46
20:53

And we need to fix it. So, how would we fix it?

calmansi 20:53
20:58

Well, I fling myself across the Atlantic to come to WIPO to say that

calmansi 20:58
21:03

WIPO must lead in this reform. And the reform has both

calmansi 21:03
21:07

a short term and a long term component.. In the short term,

calmansi 21:07
21:13

WIPO should be actively encouraging systems of voluntary licensing

calmansi 21:13
21:21

that create a better balance between the traditional ecologies

calmansi 21:21
21:24

of cultural production in the professional space

calmansi 21:24
21:29

and the amateur and scientific ecologies of creativity

calmansi 21:29
21:32

that I've also identified. That was the objective behind the project

calmansi 21:32
21:36

that I helped to found, called the Creative Commons project,

calmansi 21:36
21:41

which was to design a simple way for authors and copyright owners

calmansi 21:41
21:45

to mark their content with the freedoms that they intended it to carry.

calmansi 21:45
21:50

So rather than the default of All rights reserved, this was a Some rights reserved model

calmansi 21:50
21:53

reserving certain rights to the copyright owner,

calmansi 21:53
21:58

and releasing certain rights to the public.. You obtain this license

calmansi 21:58
22:01

by going to our site, or to a numberr of sites that have implemented it,

calmansi 22:01
22:06

independently, and selecting the uses or freedoms you'd like to allow.

calmansi 22:06
22:09

Would you like to allow others to make commercial use of your work?

calmansi 22:09
22:12

Do you want to allow others to make modifications, and if they make modifications,

calmansi 22:12
22:16

do you want to require that they release their modified work

calmansi 22:16
22:19

under a similar license, what we call "share alike".

calmansi 22:19
22:23

Those choices produce a license. And the thing to recognize is

calmansi 22:23
22:28

the way that these different licenses support these different ecologies

calmansi 22:28
22:33

differently. So the simplest and freest license, the attribution-only license,

calmansi 22:33
22:37

supports each of these ecologies, as it produces free resources

calmansi 22:37
22:40

that these ecologies can draw upon to do whatever

calmansi 22:40
22:44

each within these ecologies wants. The non commercial license

calmansi 22:44
22:49

however, supports the amateur ecology of creativity,

calmansi 22:49
22:53

allowing people to know that their work will be used by others

calmansi 22:53
22:58

according to the rules of sharing, not to the rules of buying and selling.

calmansi 22:58
23:04

And we've added, in this non commercial space, a - what we call a CC+ protocol

calmansi 23:04
23:10

that allows an option to click through to license for commercial purposes

calmansi 23:10
23:14

work that has been released to the world under non commercial terms.

calmansi 23:14
23:18

So you can release your photograph to be used and shared by people

calmansi 23:18
23:22

in a non commercial way, but have a simple transaction costfree way

calmansi 23:22
23:27

to link back to a licensing organization that could license the very same work

calmansi 23:27
23:32

for commercial purposes. The share alike license is designed to facilitate

calmansi 23:32
23:35

collaboration in both the professional and in amateur culture.

calmansi 23:35
23:40

This was the inspiration we took from the GNU-Linux operating system

calmansi 23:40
23:44

which of course is licensed under a similar copyleft license

calmansi 23:44
23:48

permitting commercial as well as non commercial developments

calmansi 23:48
23:52

and we've extended that to culture. And then just this year, we have released

calmansi 23:52
23:56

a set of protocols to facilitate marking work that's in the public domain

calmansi 23:56
24:01

or waiving rights that otherwise might exist, so that work can support

calmansi 24:01
24:04

once again each of these different ecologies in different ways.

calmansi 24:04
24:08

Last year was one of the most important years in the history of this organization.

calmansi 24:08
24:13

Al Jazeera announced that a huge archive of video material

calmansi 24:13
24:16

from the struggles in the Middle East would be available under a

calmansi 24:16
24:21

Attribution license only, meaning you can take their raw footage

calmansi 24:21
24:26

and use it in your film, or on your television station, or in your commercial applications,

calmansi 24:26
24:29

so long as you simply give attribution back to Al Jazeera

calmansi 24:29
24:33

The White House released its content under a Creative Commons license,

calmansi 24:33
24:37

Wikipedia increased - adopted the Creative Commons licenses,

calmansi 24:37
24:41

the infrastructure for all of its licensed material.

calmansi 24:41
24:44

So that last year, we saw the biggest bump in the growth of the Creative Commons

calmansi 24:44
24:51

license projects since its inception, now marking at least 350 million objects on the web.

calmansi 24:51
24:56

Now my view is, organizations like WIPO, and WIPO in particular

calmansi 24:56
25:00

need to embrace this architecture, not just Creative Commons

calmansi 25:00
25:06

but any of these architectures that import and assert the value of

calmansi 25:06
25:10

copyright licenses. Of course, the Creative Commons is

calmansi 25:10
25:13

not an alternative to copyright, it builds on copyright.

calmansi 25:13
25:18

It's a simple, valid and traditional license that had as its primary intent

calmansi 25:18
25:23

supporting of these ecologies, of creativity.

calmansi 25:23
25:29

But in supporting these ecologies of creativity, it also supports a cross-over

calmansi 25:29
25:34

into the professional ecologies of creativity. And these licenses

calmansi 25:34
25:38

are valid and enforceable, as we just discovered this week, in a Belgian court,

calmansi 25:38
25:46

which gave this band a 4500 Euro award, a damages award, because their

calmansi 25:46
25:49

because their content was used in a way inconsistent with the Creative Commons license

calmansi 25:49
25:55

that it was released under, so that it protects the author to assure that their work

calmansi 25:55
26:01

is used in the way they intended, and keeps the copyright enforcement mechanism

calmansi 26:01
26:04

open for those who violate or go beyond those terms.

calmansi 26:04
26:08

Now, my view is that these voluntary systems are not enough.

calmansi 26:08
26:12

In addition to the voluntary systems, we are going to need changes

calmansi 26:12
26:16

in law, and this is where there's a longer term change that's required.

calmansi 26:16
26:21

And in my view, once again, WIPO has to lead this longer term change.

calmansi 26:21
26:26

And I want to very strongly endorse the suggestion that has been made

calmansi 26:26
26:32

by the Director General, that in the context of this longer term inquiry,

calmansi 26:32
26:36

WIPO needs to support something like a Blue Sky commission,

calmansi 26:36
26:42

a group that has the freedom to think about what architecture for copyright makes sense

calmansi 26:42
26:47

in the digital age, freed from the current implementation of copyright

calmansi 26:47
26:52

which we inherited from the analog stage of culture.

calmansi 26:52
26:58

Now my own view is that this conclusion of this commission will have certain recommendations

calmansi 26:58
27:03

for elements to any copyright system: They'll want that the system be simple.

calmansi 27:03
27:06

If copyright is going to regulate 15-year olds, it must be something that 15-year olds

calmansi 27:06
27:16

can understand. Right now, they don't. Indeed no one understands the full reach or complexity of copyright law.

calmansi 27:16
27:23

I've been studying it intensely for 15 years and still I make fundamental and obvious mistakes.

calmansi 27:23
27:27

It needs to be re-made to make it simple. And it can be re-made

calmansi 27:27
27:31

to be made simple, if that were an objective of the reform.

calmansi 27:31
27:36

Number 2, it needs to be efficient. Copyright is a property system.

calmansi 27:36
27:40

But it is also the most inefficient property system known to man.

calmansi 27:40
27:46

The simplest idea of a property system, to know who owns what,

calmansi 27:46
27:49

Under the current system. we can't know who owns what

calmansi 27:49
27:54

because the system has been architected to give up the infrastructure necessary

calmansi 27:54
28:01

to know who owns what. And the only remedy to address this problem is to go forward

calmansi 28:01
28:06

to a modern version of formalities, not at the moment of creation,

calmansi 28:06
28:11

but at least to maintain the rights under copyright. And in this respect, I'm happy to

calmansi 28:11
28:18

acknowledge that the RIAA and I agree about the importance of formalities in a digital architecture

calmansi 28:18
28:23

for copyright in the 21st century. They have expressly endorsed the idea

calmansi 28:23
28:27

of considering formalities as a way to deal with efficiency of copyright

calmansi 28:27
28:29

and I think that suggestion is absolutely right.

calmansi 28:29
28:35

Number 3: the law has to be targeted. It means to regulate selectively.

calmansi 28:35
28:41

So if we think about the difference between taking whole copies of another person's work,

calmansi 28:41
28:45

and remixing that work, and the difference between the professional and the amateur

calmansi 28:45
28:50

I apologize, I'm an academic, I can't help but thinking in matrix like this,

calmansi 28:51
28:55

we have a matrix like this. And copyright now presumes to regulate all of these

calmansi 28:55
29:01

spaces. But that presumption makes no sense. Copyright, of course, needs to regulate

calmansi 29:01
29:08

effectively and efficiently, to stop professionals from pirating copies of other people's

calmansi 29:08
29:13

copyrighted work. That needs to be regulated as the core area

calmansi 29:13
29:19

of copyright's regulation. But just as obviously, amateurs' remixing other people's work

calmansi 29:19
29:23

should be free of copyright's regulation. Not fair use, but free use.

calmansi 29:23
29:28

There should be a presumption that such use is outside of the reach of copyright,

calmansi 29:28
29:34

and that presumption should guide and encourage this amateur building upon

calmansi 29:34
29:39

our cultural past. And then in the middle there are cases that are more mixed and more complicated,

calmansi 29:39
29:45

where the law needs to carefully figure out how to assure that the incentives are protected

calmansi 29:45
29:50

while the freedoms are assured. But the point about this model is to see

calmansi 29:50
29:54

that the objective needs to be, to deregulate a significant space of culture

calmansi 29:54
30:00

relative to the current architecture of copyright and to focus regulation where it can do some good.

calmansi 30:00
30:04

Number 4 the law must be effective, it must actually work,

calmansi 30:04
30:11

in the sense of it getting artists paid, and as any artist will tell you, the current system of copyright

calmansi 30:11
30:14

doesn't actually do that well.

calmansi 30:14
30:19

And finally number 5: it needs to be realistic about the capacity of law

calmansi 30:19
30:23

to regulate human behavior. If you think about the problem of P2P

calmansi 30:23
30:28

file-sharing internationally; what people refer to as "piracy"

calmansi 30:28
30:35

well, just after a decade into this war, a war that has totally failed.

calmansi 30:35
30:39

The objective has been to eliminate copyright "piracy".

calmansi 30:39
30:44

Now I know the response of some to a totally failed war, maybe

calmansi 30:44
30:49

some from my part of the world, is to continue to wage an ever more effective war

calmansi 30:49
30:54

against the enemy, to up the stakes, to punish more vigorously

calmansi 30:54
30:58

to win the war. My suggestion is we adopt the opposite response.

calmansi 30:58
31:04

that we find a way to sue for peace here, and adopt proposals

calmansi 31:04
31:07

where the compulsory licenses are voluntary collective licenses

calmansi 31:07
31:12

which achieve the objectives of copyright to compensate artists

calmansi 31:13
31:19

without achieving the insufficient objectives that the current regime has done.

calmansi 31:19
31:26

And we should recognize that if we had had those systems in place a decade ago,

calmansi 31:26
31:31

when they were first suggested by people suggesting changes to the existing regime

calmansi 31:31
31:35

then over the last decade, artists would have received more money

calmansi 31:35
31:40

then they did under the current system, because under the current system, P2P file-sharing

calmansi 31:40
31:45

rewards nobody except the lawyers suing to stop P2P file sharing.

calmansi 31:45
31:49

This is, we would have seen more competition, as more would have been encouraged to engage

calmansi 31:49
31:55

in a behavior that built upon this kind of creative use, because the rules would have been clearer

calmansi 31:55
32:01

but to me, the most important feature, as a father of three young children,

calmansi 32:01
32:05

is that we would not have had a generation of criminals that have grown up

calmansi 32:05
32:09

being told by us that they are criminals and internalizing the idea

calmansi 32:09
32:13

that they are criminals and living life according to that internalized idea.

calmansi 32:13
32:18

The objective of this Blue Sky commission will be to launch at least a 5-year process

calmansi 32:18
32:23

to map what we could think of as Bern 2, or I encourage you to come to Boston

calmansi 32:23
32:27

and do it in Boston as Boston 1, but they could begin to think about a system

calmansi 32:27
32:33

here that could work in the context of this digital culture. Now let me end with just one more

calmansi 32:33
32:38

reflection. So I was once asked to come participate in an event here,

calmansi 32:38
32:43

at the Association of the Bar of the city of New York. Bill Patry, who I think is going to speak

calmansi 32:43
32:50

later, was at this event with me. The room for this event is this beautiful room

calmansi 32:50
32:55

with these red velvet drapes and this red carpet. And the event was packed

calmansi 32:55
32:59

with a wide range of people, from artists and creators and at least some lawyers

calmansi 32:59
33:08

all eager to learn how the system of fair use could succor their own form of digital creativity.

calmansi 33:08
33:15

In American law, fair use has four components, four elements, and so the organizers of this event

calmansi 33:15
33:20

decided they would ask 4 lawyers to speak for 15 minutes on each of these 4 elements.

calmansi 33:20
33:25

And the theory was, after an hour, the audience would understand the law of fair use

calmansi 33:25
33:30

and go out and create consistent with the law. But as I sat there and I looked out at the audience

calmansi 33:30
33:35

the reaction after about an hour was more like this. And that reaction

calmansi 33:35
33:41

lead me to a kind of daydreaming, which was, as I looked out at this room, I began to wonder

calmansi 33:41
33:46

what it reminded me of. Because I knew there was something that room reminded me of

calmansi 33:46
33:51

its colors and its drama. And I realized that it reminded me of something I used to do

calmansi 33:51
33:56

as a kid. Just after college I spent a long time traveling through this part of the world

calmansi 33:56
34:03

and focused on this system of government. And I thought, as I was sitting there

calmansi 34:03
34:07

looking out in the room, I began to have a daydream about when was it, in the history

calmansi 34:07
34:13

of the Soviet system, that you could have convinced members of the Politburo

calmansi 34:13
34:18

that the system had failed. When, in history? I mean 1976 was way too early:

calmansi 34:18
34:23

It was puttering along and working pretty well in 1976. 1989 was too late: if they didn't

calmansi 34:23
34:27

get it by 1989, they were never going to get it, right? So when was it, between

calmansi 34:27
34:31

1976 and 1989 that they would have gotten it? And more importantly

calmansi 34:31
34:36

what could you have said to them to convince them that this romantic idea that

calmansi 34:36
34:41

they had grown up with had crashed and burnt, and to continue with the Soviet system was

calmansi 34:41
34:49

to betray a certain kind of insanity? Because, as I listened to this debate among lawyers,

calmansi 34:49
34:54

at least those of us in the United States, who engage in this debate

calmansi 34:54
34:58

lawyers who insist that nothing has changed, the same rules apply,

calmansi 34:58
35:02

it's the pirates who are the deviants - they might be right about that - but it's the pirates

calmansi 35:02
35:09

who are the deviants, I begin to believe that it is we who are insane, here.

calmansi 35:09
35:14

The existing system of copyright could never work

calmansi 35:14
35:20

in the digital architecture of the internet. Either it will force people to stop creating, or

calmansi 35:20
35:25

it will force a revolution. And both options, in my view, are not acceptable.

calmansi 35:25
35:33

We, especially here, need to recognize,there is a growing copyright abolitionist movement out there.

calmansi 35:33
35:38

People who believe that copyright might have been a good idea for other centuries

calmansi 35:38
35:44

it makes no sense in the modern era. I am against abolitionism.

calmansi 35:44
35:49

In this sense, I feel more like Gorbachov than I feel like Yeltsin

calmansi 35:49
35:53

Right, I feel like an old communist who's just trying to preserve this system

calmansi 35:53
36:00

in a new era. And I wage this war against these two extremisms. Because both extremisms

calmansi 36:00
36:05

are going to lead to the destruction of the core value of copyright.

calmansi 36:05
36:12

Now if and only if, in my view, WIPO leads in this debate, will we have the chance

calmansi 36:12
36:17

to avoid these extremisms. Now most people around the world don't care

calmansi 36:17
36:22

about preserving copyright. So one last plea, if you are in that camp,

calmansi 36:22
36:27

not likely if you're here, but one last plea: we all need to recognize

calmansi 36:27
36:31

we're not going to kill these technologies. We can only criminalize them.

calmansi 36:31
36:37

We're not going to stop our kids from being creative in a way that I at least was not creative

calmansi 36:37
36:41

as I grew up in the last century, we can only drive their creativity underground.

calmansi 36:41
36:46

We're not going to make the passive. We can only make the pirates.

calmansi 36:46
36:52

And the question we have to ask is whether that is good for free societies.

calmansi 36:52
36:58

In America, kids live in an age of prohibition. All sorts of activities in their lives are

calmansi 36:58
37:03

technically against the law, and they live life against the law.

calmansi 37:03
37:11

But that way of living life is corrosive and corrupting of the rule of law

calmansi 37:11
37:18

in a democracy. This entity needs to lead the copyright system out

calmansi 37:18
37:25

of that regime of corrupting law violations. And I urge, after 15 years

calmansi 37:25
37:29

that we at least start that process now. Thank you very much.

calmansi 37:29
37:38

(applause)