<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Free Culture Trust	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://questioncopyright.org/free-culture-thing/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://questioncopyright.org</link>
	<description>when copying is outlawed, only outlaws will have culture</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 03:04:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.2.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Terry Hancock		</title>
		<link>https://questioncopyright.org/free-culture-thing#comment-1499</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Terry Hancock]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 03:04:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://civicrm.qc-wordpress.localhost/free-culture-thing#comment-1499</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;Oh wow. I&#039;ve been thinking about something very similar lately.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;At the end of most (US) movies these days, there is a globe with a film-reel in the middle of it right at the end of the titles. I&#039;ve become so accustomed to this, that it almost doesn&#039;t feel right if it&#039;s not there. That symbol, though, is the mark of the MPAA, which I have come to regard as the &quot;Mark of the Beast&quot; by now. :-)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It&#039;d be kind of cool to have a different mark that shows up at the same point that defines the film as the product of a free-culture, um, culture.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Right now, the best available marks to send that signal are the Creative Commons license marks. But they are either deceptive (using the CC mark by itself) or hopelessly overcomplicated (using the By-SA, By, or CC0 marks). And they aren&#039;t differentiated enough from the non-free NC/ND marks (I know I&#039;m re-hashing old news there).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Having a name that makes it sound like a competitive alternative to the entrenched industry seems attractive to me, in a subversive kind of way.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I knocked around some names in my head while I was considering this, and I thought of things like &quot;Alliance of Free Culture Artists&quot; AFCA or &quot;Free Culture Alliance&quot; FCA or &quot;International Free Culture Alliance&quot; IFCA or &quot;World Free Culture Alliance&quot; WFCA. Of course, it should not be limited to film, since that would be such a tiny niche. (You could also stick &quot;Association&quot;, &quot;Union&quot;, or &quot;Forum&quot; into the above instead of &quot;Alliance&quot;. I feel that &quot;Union&quot; may be politically charged; &quot;Association&quot; is tainted by the MPAA/RIAA; and &quot;Forum&quot; sounds like a place to debate -- so I prefer &quot;Alliance&quot;, but I&#039;m not stuck on it. Graphically, it should suggest a forward-looking perspective. My first thought is &quot;make it a solar system instead of a globe&quot; -- but then, I&#039;m a space geek, so there you are.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;There are a number of things such an entity might do, including the things you&#039;ve mentioned here. It would also be really useful as an information hub for free culture artists to share their ideas about business models, licensing, suppliers, and so on.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But the biggest thing is creating a unified, recognized voice, from artists opposing the MPAA/RIAA/WIPO party line on copyright and &quot;piracy&quot; issues. It&#039;s becoming increasingly clear to me that if we don&#039;t have that, we really will get walked on by these special interests.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It sounds like this is awfully similar to what you are proposing.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I look forward to hearing more about it and/or participating.&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh wow. I&#8217;ve been thinking about something very similar lately.</p>
<p>At the end of most (US) movies these days, there is a globe with a film-reel in the middle of it right at the end of the titles. I&#8217;ve become so accustomed to this, that it almost doesn&#8217;t feel right if it&#8217;s not there. That symbol, though, is the mark of the MPAA, which I have come to regard as the &#8220;Mark of the Beast&#8221; by now. 🙂</p>
<p>It&#8217;d be kind of cool to have a different mark that shows up at the same point that defines the film as the product of a free-culture, um, culture.</p>
<p>Right now, the best available marks to send that signal are the Creative Commons license marks. But they are either deceptive (using the CC mark by itself) or hopelessly overcomplicated (using the By-SA, By, or CC0 marks). And they aren&#8217;t differentiated enough from the non-free NC/ND marks (I know I&#8217;m re-hashing old news there).</p>
<p>Having a name that makes it sound like a competitive alternative to the entrenched industry seems attractive to me, in a subversive kind of way.</p>
<p>I knocked around some names in my head while I was considering this, and I thought of things like &#8220;Alliance of Free Culture Artists&#8221; AFCA or &#8220;Free Culture Alliance&#8221; FCA or &#8220;International Free Culture Alliance&#8221; IFCA or &#8220;World Free Culture Alliance&#8221; WFCA. Of course, it should not be limited to film, since that would be such a tiny niche. (You could also stick &#8220;Association&#8221;, &#8220;Union&#8221;, or &#8220;Forum&#8221; into the above instead of &#8220;Alliance&#8221;. I feel that &#8220;Union&#8221; may be politically charged; &#8220;Association&#8221; is tainted by the MPAA/RIAA; and &#8220;Forum&#8221; sounds like a place to debate &#8212; so I prefer &#8220;Alliance&#8221;, but I&#8217;m not stuck on it. Graphically, it should suggest a forward-looking perspective. My first thought is &#8220;make it a solar system instead of a globe&#8221; &#8212; but then, I&#8217;m a space geek, so there you are.</p>
<p>There are a number of things such an entity might do, including the things you&#8217;ve mentioned here. It would also be really useful as an information hub for free culture artists to share their ideas about business models, licensing, suppliers, and so on.</p>
<p>But the biggest thing is creating a unified, recognized voice, from artists opposing the MPAA/RIAA/WIPO party line on copyright and &#8220;piracy&#8221; issues. It&#8217;s becoming increasingly clear to me that if we don&#8217;t have that, we really will get walked on by these special interests.</p>
<p>It sounds like this is awfully similar to what you are proposing.</p>
<p>I look forward to hearing more about it and/or participating.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
