4 ms·

The Dangerous Legal Strategy Coming for Our Books

littlexsparkee 1y ago
https://archive.ph/8BxF1 https://archive.ph/8BxF1
jjgreen 1y ago
The dangerous book in question: https://literacytree.com/and-tango-makes-three-twenty-years-on/ https://literacytree.com/and-tango-makes-three-twenty-years-...
bell-cot 1y ago
Obvious-seeming questions: What would be an honest total price, for the IP rights to the (say) 3 dozen books which the Legions of Censorship most wants to remove from America's libraries? Why aren't Anti-Censorship Heroes busy raising that sum, so that they can make all those books freely available on the web? Thus foiling the evil plan. Or, did The Atlantic just forget to mention that effort? (Yes, my sense is that 99% of the folks on either side of this issue are motivated by ideological posturing and zeal for combat. Not by book availability.)
- littlexsparkee 1y ago
  The problem is it doesn't end there, it's not scalable and presents a slippery slope to broader censorship
  - bell-cot 1y ago
    I've heard quite similar arguments against changing a baby's dirty diaper.
- NoFunPedant 1y ago
  Here's another obvious-seeming question: Why should would-be censors be granted power over libraries? Instead of concocting expensive schemes to get around attempts at censorship, how about if we address the problem at the source by protecting libraries, which won't cost anything?
  - bell-cot 1y ago
    > Why should would-be censors be granted power... > how about if we address the problem ... which wouldn't cost anything? This is not a Philosophy 487 essay, where clever arguments about "should" have the power to determine your, um, er - your essay grade. Reality is that they already have a great deal of power, and are gaining more. Could you explain your idea for "addressing the problem at the source ... which won't cost anything"? I'm concerned that that's just a "if all the Supreme Court Justices suddenly decided to do the Right Thing..." daydream.
    - NoFunPedant 1y ago
      Addressing the problem at the source would be a broad-based political movement that demanded enforcement of the First Amendment and a restoration of constitutional norms. That kind of political movement isn't a pipe dream -- two political scientists have extensively studied how nonviolent popular movements have overturned dictatorships: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240678278_Why_Civil_Resistance_Works_The_Strategic_Logic_of_Nonviolent_Conflict https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240678278_Why_Civil... Democracy did not come to exist because our rulers graciously granted it, but because the people demanded it and fought for it. Our current abandonment of democracy is not happening because the rulers have so much power, but because we the people continuously grant them power through our own inaction. A broad-based political movement could successfully halt the slide toward fascism and restore democracy. I am sure many people will dismiss this idea as naive. I would ask them to consider two possibilities: (1) Maybe the perception that political action is futile is not a rational judgment based on facts, but a cultural prejudice based on a fashion for cynicism. (2) A widespread perception that political action is futile is a necessary condition for authoritarian government. People who believe that political action produces practical results are more likely to engage in political activity that restrains the power of elites.
      - bell-cot 1y ago
        Nice set of ideals - but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longtermism#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longtermism#Criticism And even if everything works out exactly as you're hoping - it'll be years before you manage to put a book in any kid's hands.

https://archive.ph/8BxF1 https://archive.ph/8BxF1

The dangerous book in question: https://literacytree.com/and-tango-makes-three-twenty-years-on/ https://literacytree.com/and-tango-makes-three-twenty-years-...

bell-cot 1y ago

Obvious-seeming questions: What would be an honest total price, for the IP rights to the (say) 3 dozen books which the Legions of Censorship most wants to remove from America's libraries? Why aren't Anti-Censorship Heroes busy raising that sum, so that they can make all those books freely available on the web? Thus foiling the evil plan. Or, did The Atlantic just forget to mention that effort? (Yes, my sense is that 99% of the folks on either side of this issue are motivated by ideological posturing and zeal for combat. Not by book availability.)

littlexsparkee 1y ago
The problem is it doesn't end there, it's not scalable and presents a slippery slope to broader censorship
- bell-cot 1y ago
  I've heard quite similar arguments against changing a baby's dirty diaper.
NoFunPedant 1y ago
Here's another obvious-seeming question: Why should would-be censors be granted power over libraries? Instead of concocting expensive schemes to get around attempts at censorship, how about if we address the problem at the source by protecting libraries, which won't cost anything?
- bell-cot 1y ago
  > Why should would-be censors be granted power... > how about if we address the problem ... which wouldn't cost anything? This is not a Philosophy 487 essay, where clever arguments about "should" have the power to determine your, um, er - your essay grade. Reality is that they already have a great deal of power, and are gaining more. Could you explain your idea for "addressing the problem at the source ... which won't cost anything"? I'm concerned that that's just a "if all the Supreme Court Justices suddenly decided to do the Right Thing..." daydream.
  - NoFunPedant 1y ago
    Addressing the problem at the source would be a broad-based political movement that demanded enforcement of the First Amendment and a restoration of constitutional norms. That kind of political movement isn't a pipe dream -- two political scientists have extensively studied how nonviolent popular movements have overturned dictatorships: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240678278_Why_Civil_Resistance_Works_The_Strategic_Logic_of_Nonviolent_Conflict https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240678278_Why_Civil... Democracy did not come to exist because our rulers graciously granted it, but because the people demanded it and fought for it. Our current abandonment of democracy is not happening because the rulers have so much power, but because we the people continuously grant them power through our own inaction. A broad-based political movement could successfully halt the slide toward fascism and restore democracy. I am sure many people will dismiss this idea as naive. I would ask them to consider two possibilities: (1) Maybe the perception that political action is futile is not a rational judgment based on facts, but a cultural prejudice based on a fashion for cynicism. (2) A widespread perception that political action is futile is a necessary condition for authoritarian government. People who believe that political action produces practical results are more likely to engage in political activity that restrains the power of elites.
    - bell-cot 1y ago
      Nice set of ideals - but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longtermism#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longtermism#Criticism And even if everything works out exactly as you're hoping - it'll be years before you manage to put a book in any kid's hands.