Frasi di Lawrence Lessig

Lawrence Lessig photo
6   0

Lawrence Lessig

Data di nascita: 3. Giugno 1961

Lawrence Lessig è un giurista e avvocato statunitense.

Direttore della Edmond J. Safra Foundation Center for Ethics dell'Università di Harvard, dove insegna anche diritto, fondatore dello Stanford Center for Internet and Society , fondatore e amministratore delegato di Creative Commons, nonché membro del consiglio direttivo della Electronic Frontier Foundation e di quello del Software Freedom Law Center, costituito nel febbraio 2005, è noto soprattutto come sostenitore della riduzione delle restrizioni legali sul diritto d'autore, sui marchi commerciali e sullo spettro delle frequenze radio, in particolare nelle applicazioni tecnologiche.

Lessig ha annunciato all'iCommons Summit 07 che non si sarebbe più concentrato sul copyright e sulle tematiche ad esso legate, ma sulla corruzione nel sistema politico statunitense. Questo suo nuovo impegno sarà in parte facilitato dalla presenza del suo wiki — "Lessig Wiki" — dal momento che egli stesso ha incoraggiato i visitatori a farne uso per documentare casi di corruzione. Frutto di questo suo nuovo orientamento del proprio attivismo è l'inaugurazione, nel maggio del 2014, del Comitato di Azione Politica a finanziamento collettivo denominato "May Day PAC". Lo scopo dichiarato è di far eleggere al Congresso degli Stati Uniti candidati che si impegnino a far approvare leggi che riformino le leggi sul finanziamento ai candidati e alle forze politiche limitando fortemente la possibilità di pochi ricchi finanziatori di avere una troppo forte rappresentatività dei loro interessi nel parlamento degli Stati Uniti.

Lavori

Remix
Lawrence Lessig

Frasi Lawrence Lessig

„Fare la guerra a Internet significa fare la guerra ai nostri figli: non possiamo impedire ai nostri figli di essere creativi, ma se criminalizziamo la tecnologia, rendiamo i nostri figli pirati e clandestini.“

—  Lawrence Lessig

dal convegno Il web e la trasparenza tra ideali e realtà, 11 marzo 2010, La stampa http://www.lastampa.it/redazione/cmsSezioni/cultura/201003articoli/53052girata.asp

„Now that copyrights can be just about a century long, the inability to know what is protected and what is not protected becomes a huge and obvious burden on the creative process.“

—  Lawrence Lessig, libro Free Culture

Free Culture (2004)
Contesto: Now that copyrights can be just about a century long, the inability to know what is protected and what is not protected becomes a huge and obvious burden on the creative process. If the only way a library can offer an Internet exhibit about the New Deal is to hire a lawyer to clear the rights to every image and sound, then the copyright system is burdening creativity in a way that has never been seen before because there are no formalities.

„I will say the word: To hell with the fair uses. What about the unregulated uses we had of culture before this massive expansion of control?“

—  Lawrence Lessig

OSCON 2002
Contesto: Here's a simple copyright lesson: Law regulates copies. What's that mean? Well, before the Internet, think of this as a world of all possible uses of a copyrighted work. Most of them are unregulated. Talking about fair use, this is not fair use; this is unregulated use. To read is not a fair use; it's an unregulated use. To give it to someone is not a fair use; it's unregulated. To sell it, to sleep on top of it, to do any of these things with this text is unregulated. Now, in the center of this unregulated use, there is a small bit of stuff regulated by the copyright law; for example, publishing the book — that's regulated. And then within this small range of things regulated by copyright law, there's this tiny band before the Internet of stuff we call fair use: Uses that otherwise would be regulated but that the law says you can engage in without the permission of anybody else. For example, quoting a text in another text — that's a copy, but it's a still fair use. That means the world was divided into three camps, not two: Unregulated uses, regulated uses that were fair use, and the quintessential copyright world. Three categories.
Enter the Internet. Every act is a copy, which means all of these unregulated uses disappear. Presumptively, everything you do on your machine on the network is a regulated use. And now it forces us into this tiny little category of arguing about, "What about the fair uses? What about the fair uses?" I will say the word: To hell with the fair uses. What about the unregulated uses we had of culture before this massive expansion of control?

„We really need to think quite pragmatically about whether intellectual property is helping or hurting, and if you can't show it's going to help, then there is no reason to issue this government-backed monopoly.“

—  Lawrence Lessig

"Code + Law: An Interview with Lawrence Lessig" at O'Reilly P2P (29 January 2001)(29 January 2001)
Contesto: Our problem is that lawyers have taught us that there is only one kind of economic market for innovation out there and it is this kind of isolated inventor who comes up with an idea and then needs to be protected. That is a good picture of maybe what pharmaceutical industry does. It's a bad picture of what goes on, for example, in the context of software development, in particular. In the context of software development, where you have sequential and complementary developments, patents create an extraordinarily damaging influence on innovation and on the process of developing and bringing new ideas to market. So the particular mistake that lawyers have compounded is the unwillingness to discriminate among different kinds of innovation.
We really need to think quite pragmatically about whether intellectual property is helping or hurting, and if you can't show it's going to help, then there is no reason to issue this government-backed monopoly.

„A free culture is not a culture without property; it is not a culture in which artists don't get paid. A culture without property, or in which creators can't get paid, is anarchy, not freedom. Anarchy is not what I advance here. Instead, the free culture that I defend in this book is a balance between anarchy and control.“

—  Lawrence Lessig, libro Free Culture

Free Culture (2004)
Contesto: A free culture has been our past, but it will only be our future if we change the path we are on right now. Like Stallman's arguments for free software, an argument for free culture stumbles on a confusion that is hard to avoid, and even harder to understand. A free culture is not a culture without property; it is not a culture in which artists don't get paid. A culture without property, or in which creators can't get paid, is anarchy, not freedom. Anarchy is not what I advance here. Instead, the free culture that I defend in this book is a balance between anarchy and control. A free culture, like a free market, is filled with property. It is filled with rules of property and contract that get enforced by the state. But just as a free market is perverted if its property becomes feudal, so too can a free culture be queered by extremism in the property rights that define it. That is what I fear about our culture today. It is against that extremism that this book is written.

Help us translate English quotes

Discover interesting quotes and translate them.

Start translating

„Monopolies are not justified by theory; they should be permitted only when justified by facts. If there is no solid basis for extending a certain monopoly protection, then we should not extend that protection.“

—  Lawrence Lessig

May the Source Be With You (2001)
Contesto: While control is needed, and perfectly warranted, our bias should be clear up front: Monopolies are not justified by theory; they should be permitted only when justified by facts. If there is no solid basis for extending a certain monopoly protection, then we should not extend that protection. This does not mean that every copyright must prove its value initially. That would be a far too cumbersome system of control. But it does mean that every system or category of copyright or patent should prove its worth. Before the monopoly should be permitted, there must be reason to believe it will do some good — for society, and not just for monopoly holders.

„In the context of software development, where you have sequential and complementary developments, patents create an extraordinarily damaging influence on innovation and on the process of developing and bringing new ideas to market.“

—  Lawrence Lessig

"Code + Law: An Interview with Lawrence Lessig" at O'Reilly P2P (29 January 2001)(29 January 2001)
Contesto: Our problem is that lawyers have taught us that there is only one kind of economic market for innovation out there and it is this kind of isolated inventor who comes up with an idea and then needs to be protected. That is a good picture of maybe what pharmaceutical industry does. It's a bad picture of what goes on, for example, in the context of software development, in particular. In the context of software development, where you have sequential and complementary developments, patents create an extraordinarily damaging influence on innovation and on the process of developing and bringing new ideas to market. So the particular mistake that lawyers have compounded is the unwillingness to discriminate among different kinds of innovation.
We really need to think quite pragmatically about whether intellectual property is helping or hurting, and if you can't show it's going to help, then there is no reason to issue this government-backed monopoly.

„Now you look at this and you say this is insane. It's insane.“

—  Lawrence Lessig

OSCON 2002
Contesto: Here's a story: There was a documentary filmmaker who was making a documentary film about education in America. And he's shooting across this classroom with lots of people, kids, who are completely distracted at the television in the back of the classroom. When they get back to the editing room, they realize that on the television, you can barely make out the show for two seconds; it's "The Simpsons," Homer Simpson on the screen. So they call up Matt Groening, who was a friend of the documentary filmmaker, and say, you know, Is this going to be a problem? It's only a couple seconds. Matt says, No, no, no, it's not going to be a problem, call so and so. So they called so and so, and so and so said call so and so.
Eventually, the so and so turns out to be the lawyers, so when they got to the lawyers, they said, Is this going to be a problem? It's a documentary film. It's about education. It's a couple seconds. The so and so said 25,000 bucks. 25,000 bucks?! It's a couple seconds! What do you mean 25,000 bucks? The so and so said, I don't give a goddamn what it is for. $25,000 bucks or change your movie. Now you look at this and you say this is insane. It's insane. And if it is only Hollywood that has to deal with this, OK, that's fine. Let them be insane. The problem is their insane rules are now being applied to the whole world. This insanity of control is expanding as everything you do touches copyrights.

„Show me why your regulation of culture is needed. Show me how it does good. And until you can show me both, keep your lawyers away.“

—  Lawrence Lessig, libro Free Culture

Free Culture (2004)
Contesto: The law should regulate in certain areas of culture — but it should regulate culture only where that regulation does good. Yet lawyers rarely test their power, or the power they promote, against this simple pragmatic question: "Will it do good?" When challenged about the expanding reach of the law, the lawyer answers, "Why not?"
We should ask, "Why?" Show me why your regulation of culture is needed. Show me how it does good. And until you can show me both, keep your lawyers away.

„They win because we've done nothing to stop it.“

—  Lawrence Lessig

OSCON 2002
Contesto: It's insane. It's extreme. It's controlled by political interests. It has no justification in the traditional values that justify legal regulation. And we've done nothing about it. We're bigger than they are. We've got rights on our side. And we've done nothing about it. We let them control this debate. Here's the refrain that leads to this: They win because we've done nothing to stop it.

„The most powerful and sexy and well loved of lobbies really has as its aim not the protection of "property" but the rejection of a tradition. Their aim is not simply to protect what is theirs. Their aim is to assure that all there is is what is theirs.“

—  Lawrence Lessig, libro Free Culture

Free Culture (2004)
Contesto: The most powerful and sexy and well loved of lobbies really has as its aim not the protection of "property" but the rejection of a tradition. Their aim is not simply to protect what is theirs. Their aim is to assure that all there is is what is theirs.
It is not hard to understand why the warriors take this view. It is not hard to see why it would benefit them if the competition of the public domain tied to the Internet could somehow be quashed.

„That means the world was divided into three camps, not two: Unregulated uses, regulated uses that were fair use, and the quintessential copyright world. Three categories.“

—  Lawrence Lessig

OSCON 2002
Contesto: Here's a simple copyright lesson: Law regulates copies. What's that mean? Well, before the Internet, think of this as a world of all possible uses of a copyrighted work. Most of them are unregulated. Talking about fair use, this is not fair use; this is unregulated use. To read is not a fair use; it's an unregulated use. To give it to someone is not a fair use; it's unregulated. To sell it, to sleep on top of it, to do any of these things with this text is unregulated. Now, in the center of this unregulated use, there is a small bit of stuff regulated by the copyright law; for example, publishing the book — that's regulated. And then within this small range of things regulated by copyright law, there's this tiny band before the Internet of stuff we call fair use: Uses that otherwise would be regulated but that the law says you can engage in without the permission of anybody else. For example, quoting a text in another text — that's a copy, but it's a still fair use. That means the world was divided into three camps, not two: Unregulated uses, regulated uses that were fair use, and the quintessential copyright world. Three categories.
Enter the Internet. Every act is a copy, which means all of these unregulated uses disappear. Presumptively, everything you do on your machine on the network is a regulated use. And now it forces us into this tiny little category of arguing about, "What about the fair uses? What about the fair uses?" I will say the word: To hell with the fair uses. What about the unregulated uses we had of culture before this massive expansion of control?

„What's needed is a way to say something in the middle — neither "all rights reserved" nor "no rights reserved" but "some rights reserved" — and thus a way to respect copyrights but enable creators to free content as they see fit. In other words, we need a way to restore a set of freedoms that we could just take for granted before.“

—  Lawrence Lessig, libro Free Culture

Free Culture (2004)
Contesto: Common sense is with the copyright warriors because the debate so far has been framed at the extremes — as a grand either/or: either property or anarchy, either total control or artists won't be paid. If that really is the choice, then the warriors should win.
The mistake here is the error of the excluded middle. There are extremes in this debate, but the extremes are not all that there is. There are those who believe in maximal copyright — "All Rights Reserved" — and those who reject copyright — "No Rights Reserved." The "All Rights Reserved" sorts believe that you should ask permission before you "use" a copyrighted work in any way. The "No Rights Reserved" sorts believe you should be able to do with content as you wish, regardless of whether you have permission or not.... What's needed is a way to say something in the middle — neither "all rights reserved" nor "no rights reserved" but "some rights reserved" — and thus a way to respect copyrights but enable creators to free content as they see fit. In other words, we need a way to restore a set of freedoms that we could just take for granted before.

„It's a bumper sticker culture. People have to get it like that, and if they don't, if it takes three seconds to make them understand, you're off their radar screen. Three seconds to understand, or you lose. This is our problem.“

—  Lawrence Lessig

OSCON 2002
Contesto: J. C. Watts is the only black member of the Republican Party in leadership. He's going to resign from Congress. He's been there seven and a half years. He's had enough. Nobody can believe it. Nobody in Washington can believe it.... In an interview two days ago, Watts said, Here's the problem with Washington: "If you are explaining, you are losing." If you are explaining, you're losing. It's a bumper sticker culture. People have to get it like that, and if they don't, if it takes three seconds to make them understand, you're off their radar screen. Three seconds to understand, or you lose. This is our problem. Six years after this battle began, we're still explaining. We're still explaining and we are losing. They frame this as a massive battle to stop theft, to protect property.... They extend copyrights perpetually. They don't get how that in itself is a form of theft. A theft of our common culture. We have failed in getting them to see what the issues here are and that's why we live in this place where a tradition speaks of freedom and their controls take it away.

„Never has it been more controlled ever. Take the addition, the changes, the copyrights turn, take the changes to copyrights scope, put it against the background of an extraordinarily concentrated structure of media, and you produce the fact that never in our history have fewer people controlled more of the evolution of our culture. Never.“

—  Lawrence Lessig

OSCON 2002
Contesto: Now, here's the thing you've got to remember. You've got to see this. This is the point. (And Jack Valenti misses this.) Here's the point: Never has it been more controlled ever. Take the addition, the changes, the copyrights turn, take the changes to copyrights scope, put it against the background of an extraordinarily concentrated structure of media, and you produce the fact that never in our history have fewer people controlled more of the evolution of our culture. Never.

„Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Etiam egestas wisi a erat. Morbi imperdiet, mauris ac auctor dictum.“

Autori simili

Lauren Kate photo
Lauren Kate29
scrittrice statunitense
Laurell K. Hamilton photo
Laurell K. Hamilton41
scrittrice statunitense
Rick Riordan photo
Rick Riordan44
scrittore statunitense
Patrick Rothfuss photo
Patrick Rothfuss3
scrittore statunitense
Chris Kyle photo
Chris Kyle23
militare statunitense
Cassandra Clare photo
Cassandra Clare212
scrittrice statunitense
Vittorio Arrigoni photo
Vittorio Arrigoni69
scrittore e attivista italiano
Malala Yousafzai photo
Malala Yousafzai32
attivista pakistana
John Green photo
John Green15
scrittore statunitense
Chuck Palahniuk photo
Chuck Palahniuk206
scrittore statunitense
Anniversari di oggi
Rabindranath Tagore photo
Rabindranath Tagore64
poeta, drammaturgo, scrittore e filosofo indiano 1861 - 1941
Kary Mullis photo
Kary Mullis35
biochimico statunitense 1944 - 2019
Miguel Ángel Zotto photo
Miguel Ángel Zotto4
ballerino argentino 1958
Alexandr Alexandrovič Blok photo
Alexandr Alexandrovič Blok118
poeta russo 1880 - 1921
Altri 71 anniversari oggi
Autori simili
Lauren Kate photo
Lauren Kate29
scrittrice statunitense
Laurell K. Hamilton photo
Laurell K. Hamilton41
scrittrice statunitense
Rick Riordan photo
Rick Riordan44
scrittore statunitense
Patrick Rothfuss photo
Patrick Rothfuss3
scrittore statunitense
Chris Kyle photo
Chris Kyle23
militare statunitense