we need a table

I’m sitting on a Via train, heading back to the snowy wilderness that is Toronto, after a day of meetings with the Canada Council for the Arts in Ottawa. More on the CC at a later date.

This meeting and others like it are the reason I’ve been so silent on the blog, though I assure all commenters I’ve been reading and chuckling at your various smiley face emoticons and winks.

A couple quick notes of interest related to the copyright debate and the state of the cultural sector in Canada.

Firstly, as this train speeds through the cold Ontario night, I note with some small discomfort that all the members of the “creator” class who attended the Canada Council meetings are riding with me here in the Comfort section of Via, while all the members of the “producer” class are riding up front in Via One, enjoying a complimentary dinner and drinks. We’re also drinking back here in coach, but we pay by the glass.

Secondly, I report with delight that I ran into Phillip Smith of Community Bandwidth at the station, and he is sitting across from me right now – the “Your Whole System Sucks” sticker on his laptop is almost touching the Captain Copyright sticker on my laptop. Beside me is Amela Simic, writer, translator and Executive Director of the Playwrights’ Guild of Canada. Phillip, Amela and I had a quick talk in the station about the upcoming copyright bill, and all the various sides and interests involved, and despite Phillip’s peg-leg and eye-patch, we’ve managed to be nothing but civil with each other.

This convinces me, again, that Russell McOrmond is probably absolutely correct that most of our disagreements might just boil down to semantic misunderstandings, and that if we could just get everyone sitting around one big table with microphones, we’d have this thing all negotiated and worked out, with fairness for all, in no time. The government could watch over this process, and we’d even then allow them to take all the credit for the incredibly wise bill that comes out of it.

I know some government types regularly troll around this blog, looking to see which way various winds are blowing, so this message is for you:

Get us a table and some microphones, some translators (French/English and Tech/Analog), and then sit back and watch the magic. Of course, someone’s going to have to go and get the producers and publishers from first class.

kids these days

Others blogging on copyright are way ahead of me, and have already linked to this David Pogue piece in the New York Times. I think I'm slow off the mark on this because of my advanced age.

Anyway, Pogue writes -- for filthy money, protected by copyright -- that he has identified something called a "generational divide" on the question of music file-sharing and movie copying. I'm assuming he didn't write the word "gap" to avoid any kind of American-style trademark litigation.

Pogue poses a bunch of ethical questions re: file-sharing to a room of 500 young college students, trying to find their ethical tolerance line on file-sharing. He's shocked to find there is not really a line.

Relevant quote:

Finally, with mock exasperation, I said, "O.K., let's try one that's a little less complicated: You want a movie or an album. You don't want to pay for it. So you download it."

There it was: the bald-faced, worst-case example, without any nuance or mitigating factors whatsoever.

"Who thinks that might be wrong?"

Two hands out of 500.

I know, I know, culture should not be owned, but who can read Pogue's article and not come to some understanding about why cultural professionals might worry a bit over eroding copyright? Who, I ask.

Well, not copyfighter Russell McOrmond -- the Bugs Bunny to my Daffy Duck in our own classic "rabbit season! duck season!" bit -- who writes rather eloquently (bolding is mine):

I see no reason why well paid professional creators cannot exist in a world where every citizen has personal control over the tools used to participate in culture. Yes, some people will abuse these tools to infringe copyright just like people jaywalk today without any technological help. If everyone jaywalked, our transportation system would come to a standstill and many people would be physically harmed. There will always be reasonable legal and business means to deal with these types of problems.

498 out of 500 is, admittedly, not everyone, but we can probably agree that's a significant percentage of jaywalkers on the superhighway.

Here's Dr. Laura Murray, a proponent of "fair" copyright with whom I have also disagreed in cartoon-like fashion on many points:

Myself, I think that culture is worth paying for. How, is the question...

My point is that if we want to support cultural innovation, we have to look at copyright as one tool among a wide range of tools, which include grants, stipends, cheap tuition, tax breaks, support for museums and galleries and other arts institutions, and a government commitment to give Canadians free digital access to their cultural heritage.

This all reminds me of a stunning conversation I had a couple years back. I'm in my early forties, and I was telling someone in her late twenties about my buddy's CD collection, which is enormous, and must have cost him thousands of dollars which he happily paid (though he is also a fantastic bargain hunter). He owns even more books, by the way -- fantastic consumer of culture. Anyway, as I'm waxing devotional about my older friend and his collections, my younger friend interrupted me and said "I don't know anyone who owns a CD collection. Everyone I know just shares their music -- no one buys it."

And people wonder why the book industry is a bit worried about unlocked e-books?

I've said it before (see the link above):

I think the mass of consumers can be trusted to respect copyright and the need for compensation that encourages continued creativity in a market-based economy, eventually.

Key words:

Trust -- publishers and creators need to learn to trust consumers to do the right thing with unlocked content.

Respect -- consumers, young and old, must respect copyright.

One won't work without the other.

Hobby horse point -- who might teach that respect? Universities -- they certainly have the captive audience.