All content in this wiki is in the PublicDomain except where it notes otherwise. Please be good to our authors. Thank you!
For more about the Public Domain, please see the  Ethical Public Domain website.
Merits of the Public Domain
Ultimately, Creative Commons is another form of Copyright.
The Public Domain represents a completely different perspective:
- It emphasizes culture solutions based on ethics rather than law.
- It allows and encourages people to use their own best judgment, rather than negotiate permissions.
- It avoids chains of licenses and the questions of what are the boundaries of a work?
- It filters in people who truly want to share, and filters out those who want control.
- It recognizes that knowledge is worthless outside of context, but wealth is human relationships that are the context, thus orients us around people rather than content.
- It is a genuine solution that encourages genuine respect for licenses and the law.
- In the form of "Public Domain except as noted", it is compatible with all licenses except for "share alike" licenses, and it makes it possible to gradually migrate to the Public Domain.
As we're getting ready for the Communia meeting in London we can help with some of the PublicDomain projects there such as collecting information about Open Source Courseware (see Textbooks and ClassicMathProblems) and about collecting PublicDomain business models: CommuniaW4
Suggestions To Communia for PublicDomain policy for the EuropeanUnion
We Have the Right to Share
Currently, the laws of the European Union presume that any creative work is necessarily protected by copyright and the author must explicitly approve all uses. This conflicts with the wishes of people who want to share creative work freely in the Public Domain so that all may rely on their own best judgement to use it, transform it, incorporate it and share it.
We, the people of the European Union, acknowledge a right to share, just as we do the right to own. These two rights are related. The purpose of ownership is stewardship. The steward of property is recognized as the judge of how to apply that property so that it serves the best use of all. The steward has the right to transfer their property, to allow some or even all to apply their own best judgement. If we have the right to own property, then we must also have the right to share it.
By acknowledging the right to own, we acknowledge the wisdom of the society of all which acknowledges and defends such a right. Likewise, we may entrust our creative works to that same wisdom.
Creative Work Law
Creativity is positive. There is no need for laws to restrict it, but rather for laws to restrict those who might inhibit it, those who might retard the evolution of society. Creative work law (historically known as copyright law) is phrased and structured accordingly.
Our right to share is especially relevant for creative works from which other works can be derived or copied. Such works are purposeful and fruitful when they inspire other such works, when they are social. Creative work law does not apply to secret works or private works, but to social works. The purpose of creative work law is to encourage the creation of fruitful works and social wealth, not fruitless works nor private wealth. Creative work law is not meant to encourage the creation of single works, but rather, to encourage the creation of all of their derived works, and especially, the cultivation of a creative culture.
A culture is shaped by ethics and norms. Norms are implicit, but laws are explicit. Laws may support norms, but cannot define them. Creative work law is established to nurture a creative culture, including support and regard for creators and creations. Creative work law succeeds by defining a broad and thriving "grey zone" of "fair use".
The joys of creative work are direct and thus a greater benefit than any monetary profit. The best use of a work is informed by this joy more so than any other incentive. Creative work law protects, first of all, the interests and rights of those who wish to enjoy a work so that it is available.
Creative work law honors and presumes people's desire to share. Terms for the distribution of creative works presume that people will share and provide positive incentives to support and engage such behavior or they are void.
Creative work law does not favor those who break the law over those who follow the law, nor those who encourage the breaking of the law over those encourage others to follow the law. Similar, Terms of Service do not favor those who ignore them over those who break them over those who follow them. Any such laws and terms are excessive and void.
The State is the Champion of the Public Domain
If we don't know otherwise, do we presume that people want to share or to own? We presume that people wish to allow copying unless they make evident otherwise. The right to share has priority over the right to own.
The European Union and its member states have the responsibility to protect property. The state's protection of property used by a wider group has priority over its protection of comparable property used by a narrower group. The state's protection of property used by all (and especially, the commons) has the highest priority.
The state's responsibility to protect property is greatest for that which lacks a defender, protector, caretaker or steward. The state promotes stewardship, including individual stewardship, but especially, a culture of collective stewardship. The state is the champion and steward for a thriving Public Domain.
The state reflects the will of all together to respect the rights of all separately. The state accordingly presumes, implicitly, our shared will, so that it might respect, explicitly, our distinct wills. The state defines an expansive Public Domain so that deliberate individuals may benefit from Copyright protection which is focused and effective.
Public Domain has Priority over Copyright
The European Union prepares and issues a directive that all member countries pass laws and ammend constitutions, as needed, so that for creative works, the Public Domain has priority over Copyright.
Works are creative in that they transcend the will of the author. Work may be partly creative, not entirely transcendent. Authors may restrict the use of their work by Copyright only to the extent that their work is NOT creative. The lack of creativity is given by the author's style as evident in the form of the created work.
Works of God, nature and genius are absolutely creative. They transcend style. Anyone may use such works in the Public Domain if they explicitly regard them accordingly, free of style.
Works of and by governments are in the Public Domain, as are documents of any institutions beholden to the public, the will of all together.
Copyright works must be marked as such, using the copyright sign along with the year. Otherwise, they may be considered to be in the Public Domain.
Copyright works must include or be distributed along with a reference to where can be found further information on the author of the work and the owner of the copyright, the boundaries of the work, the works it derives from, the scope of fair use, and how to contact the owner of the copyright to request additional use of the work.
Works that derive from the Public Domain must make available, in the Public Domain, any works that they build on. Otherwise, they themselves may be used as if they were in the Public Domain, and ultimately, they fall into the Public Domain.
Creative works may be explicitly placed in the Public Domain.
Creative works can be owned or managed only by human beings, not by corporations or any other fictitious persons which by their nature are incapable of creating them.
The Right to Change One's Mind
Our creativity is how we transcend ourselves. Our creative culture depends on our completely voluntary participation and thus accomodates any author who wishes, at any time, for any reason, to remove their work from the Public Domain.
Commercial works may leverage Public Domain materials but need to be prepared to negotiate with authors or stop making use of their works.
The author who changes their mind may inform and require any and all owners of copies or derivatives of the work in question to negotiate terms of ownership or to remove all traces of the work.
Such owners are not liable for past use of the work, but for future use and distribution of the work, responding within a practical timeline.
Creative works, such as orphan works, with no apparent caretaker may be presumed to belong to the Public Domain until the creator asserts otherwise.
Developing Norms and Regulations
The European Union supports and establishes institutions that develop regulations and foster norms for a thriving Public Domain.
Absolute minimum interpretations of "fair use" are established for a variety of practical situations, such as any publicly posted text that is 140 characters or less.
Absolute maximal interpretations of "fair use" are likewise established.
"Fair use" is defined in the most liberal way unless the creative work references it's own explanation of "fair use".
Authors are presumed to grant all requests for expansive "fair use". Users who write to authors requesting expansive "fair use" may presume their request has been granted until they receive a response otherwise.
The standard for "due diligence" in checking for authors and their wishes is proportional to the value of the derived works in question.
Copyright owners of mass consumed works assume that users do abide by an honor system and provide them with ways for making payments (or micropayments) upon making copies or creating derivative works.
Penalties for abuse of copyright are of the same order of magnitude as the claimant's actual losses and the defendant's gains.
Content generated in online venues (mailing lists, wikis, blogs, comments) is Public Domain unless each item explicitly states otherwise.
Website Terms of service may not be used to limit the rights of authors or users, whether Public Domain, Copyright or "fair use".
Any material made publicly accessible on the Internet, may be freely copied and distributed further, in electronic, print or other versions, without restriction. Distributors may charge for such distribution as long as they do not exclude other distributors.
The terms "commercial use" and "non-commercial use" are clarified so that "commercial use" refers simply to selling a creative work.
A procedure exists for querying publishers whether they intend to reprint out-of-print works or, alternatively, whether they will allow others to do so under standard terms.
A procedure exists for establishing the "authors' wishes" for works (like Wikipedia) with no clear author. A procedure exists by which such works can thereby be migrated from one license to another or the Public Domain.
No license may be designed to be incompatible with the Public Domain. ("Share alike" licenses must not conflict with the Public Domain.)
Separate laws address damages due to plagiarism and false claims to authorship.
State policy
The European Union and member states take an active approach to fostering the Public Domain as central to public life.
Government funding standards and purchasing standards require that, wherever possible, content (such as school textbooks) be in the Public Domain.
Government services, requirements, standards (as in education) may not require use of particular software but most instead define formats for which software can be created.
Governments purchase works so that they enter the Public Domain and/or reward authors for works they've place in the Public Domain. This is the principal support for the arts and sciences.
Governments may exercise "eminent domain" to purchase works at fair market prices and place them in the Public Domain.
Governments prepare registries of Public Domain works built by volunteers and reward participants, but especially as a way of channeling economic stimulus monies.
Government funds used to bail out private companies such as banks, automobile manufacturers, etc. are first used to increase transparency and openness and the public wealth, for example, making open source the design of cars.
Governments champion worldwide the free flow of ideas and content just as they champion the free flow of trade.
Government or insurers allows for insurance for those who use and reuse creative works to cover their transgressions.
Anonymous works such as grafitti are defined as folklore in the Public Domain.
In order to encourage an economy around the Public Domain, and voluntary work, in general:
Money paid, in advance, for work to be done in the Public Domain, is not considered work for pay, thus free of any related taxes, Social Security payments, and other obligations. The payer of the money may consider such payments as a business expense if the report the amounts and pay a proportional tax.
Given that "wealth is relationships", that wealth is generated by including people, and that contributing to the Public Domain and "working for free" filter in people who share and invest in the commons:
The European Union develops a distribution mechanism to stimulate the growth of underdeveloped areas, such as the countryside, by issuing vouchers (say, 1000 euros each) to those who "work for free" and participate in institutions, including government, business, academia, to spend freely on those likewise from the target group. Such a system will not need reporting or monitoring.
The European Union gives priority to local cultures so that they are not dominated by international cultures. A distinction is to be made between works in international languages (such as English) and local languages (such as Lithuanian) as well as languages that are not official languages of the European Union (such as African languages). Works published in the European Union in international languages may, without restriction or special permission, be translated into the Public Domain in local languages and non-European languages.
Theoretical Foundations
Creativity is a basic human trait and activity. The European Union sponsors dialogue to clarify the theoretical foundations of creative work and the practical consequences.
A general theory may consider that a creative work is deliberate and not accidental. Deliberateness may be defined as the application of distinct parsers, for example, two for fair use, and three for a fully creative work. See "The Algebra of Copyright" by Andrius Kulikauskas, http://www.ms.lt/en/publishing/TheAlgebraOfCopyright.html
A general theory may define the nature of style. Copyright protection applies only to form, and in particular, only to style. Works for which the style is altered beyond recognition may not be copyrighted.
Add Your Comments
| 
