Cory Doctorow Slams Slogan "Information Wants to Be Free"
Source: Joi Ito, http://commons.wikimedia.org
Through his work on the blog Boing Boing as well as through organizations like the Electronic Frontiers Foundation, the author Cory Doctorow has emerged as one of the most prominent copyright activists in the world. Thus it is noteworthy to hear that the "copyfighter" Cory has recently used twitter to attack the slogan "Information wants to be free," a rallying cry for many who resist Internet-era copyright and patent laws. His tweets on the subject are like a series of argumentative haiku:
- “Information wants 2B free” is no more the rallying cry of free culture than “Kill whitey” is the basis of civil rights movement…
- “Information wants to be free” is lazy, stupid shorthand for a complex and nuanced discussion that can be readily found…
- Example: Copyfighters don’t want open gov-data because “info wants to be free.” They want it because they paid for it with tax…
- Copyfighters don’t want the right to excerpt and quote b/c info wants to be free – it’s b/c this is the basis of all discourse …
- Copyfighters don’t want the right to build on earlier works b/c “info wants to be free”—it’s b/c that's how all creativity starts…
"Lazy, stupid shorthand" -- that's harsh, especially for such a popular slogan. Do you agree?
(Thanks to our friends at Utne Reader for the tip.)
New to copyright issues? Have some time on your hands? You might watch this 90-minute film, Rip: A Remix Manifesto, which features Cory and provides an ideal overview of the issues surrounding twenty-first-century copyright law and cultural sharing:
Comments
Neal Gorenflo wrote on 02.11.10, 3:20pm:
What Colin said! Cory seems to be purposefully overstating. It's usefully provocative.
Douglas, Redding wrote on 02.11.10, 11:52pm:
I think Cory is right, but completely agree with Neal and T. Colin. "Information wants to be Free", is a perfectly cromulent phrase, but to question and dissect any catchphrase is always good policy, and a nice conversation starter. Doctorow embiggens us all. But, what do I know, I'm still a big fan of, "Kill Whitey".
"What hempen homespuns have we swaggering here, So near the cradle of the fairy queen?"
Seth Johnson wrote on 02.12.10, 12:33am:
Information *is* free. Talking about it "wanting" or "trying" sells us short.
It is free, as far as copyright is concerned, always has been, and always will be unless the maximalists manage to change copyright into some sort of prior restraint, some sort of right of the author to deterministically and preemptively control what you do with it. That is to say, unless the maximalists manage to impose a tyrannical world order.
Copyright doesn't cover information -- it covers original expression. If it's published, you can use it, and that's the purpose of copyright: to get stuff published so we can use it.
Neal Gorenflo wrote on 02.12.10, 12:39pm:
Seth, good point. A while back I did some research about cookbooks and copyright. Turns out that lists of ingredients and their amounts can not be copyrighted. It's only the original expression around the ingredients that have protection. So this is an example of information being free yet copyright being in place.
Anonymous wrote on 12.16.10, 7:06pm:
This video can only be streamed within the United States
The irony.
Far be it from me to disagree with one of my heroes, but I think he's overstating it a bit.
Before I knew anything about copyright issues, I found this phrase compelling. The heart of it, as I understand it, is true. Sharing (and seeking, unearthing, acquiring) information is as human, and as important to survival, as breathing or eating. Right or wrong, it is something we are wired to do.
So it's not that the information "wants" to be free, it's that human beings perpetually search for information and will barter, beg, borrow and steal to get it. Once they have information, they will share it to curry favor, power, whatever else they need.
I took it (the phrase) to mean that it was inevitable that people would share information.
Sure, it is an oversimplification, but most good rallying cries are.
I do agree that it is too easy, and that people should seek to understand the larger issues, but for something to get someone started, it's not so bad.
The phrase served its purpose until now. Maybe we do need a new one.
opensource.com
Where open source multiplies