[Italiano sotto]

Hi all,

Over the last month I've spoken to a number of people about the need to create a common discussion on the subject of intellectual property, communications and immaterial production. The first transnational hackmeeting planned for Pula in June suggests that the moment may be right to try and develop a common response to a shared problem.

The recent announcement of legal actions against users of P2P networks makes this more urgent, IMHO. The proposal is attached below and has not been made public yet. I have no desire to manage or control this project and will not circulate it until there is a response and amendment of the text that reflects that it is a shared interest.

If you would like your response forwarded to the people bcc'ed on this mail, please indicate so. If you don't want to receive any further mail on this matter, just let me know.

cheers,

a.

Ciao Tutti/e,

Da un mese sto parlando con diverse gente del bisogno di creare una discussione condivisa sul sogetto di proprieta intelletuale, communicazioni e la produzione immateriale. Il primo hackmeeting progettato per Pula alla fine di giugno suggerisce che puo essere il momento adatto per provare sviluppare una risposta commune a una problema condivisa.

L'annuncio negli ultimi giorni dell'inizio di cause giuridiche contro gli utenti di rete P2P in Europa lo rende ancora piu urgente. Il documento sotto non e' publico xche non ho voglia, comunque, di gestire o controllare un tale progetto e quindi non sara messo in circolazione fino che ci fosse una risposta e amendimento del testo che indica che c'e' un interesso condiviso.

Mi dispiace che il descrizione e' solo in inglese.

Se vuoi la tua risposta girata anche a chi sta sul 'bcc' di questa mail, indicarlo. Se non vuoi riecevere altri messagi su questa facenda, fami sape' ;)

saluti,

a.

==================

Proposal for a wiki based/modular collection for a common european discussion; (or the mother of all FAQs and some polyphony....)

Form/Content a reader/dossier/assemblage on the following three themes:

- intellectual property - immaterial labour - communications

basically broken down into four sections:

(1) - introduction to the concepts and the key problems [clear explanations of functioning, consequences, locations of decision-making power, interconnections]

(2) - descriptions of actions carried out to contest/render visible the conflictuality in them [satellite decryption, attacks on advertising, strategies of workplace disruption, technical techniques for circumnavigating enclosures etc.]

(3) - alternative propositions capable of resolving the problems which the existing institutions in this area are supposedly intended to solve [self-organization, licensing, lo-tech technics, non-proprietary solutions, hacklabs]

(4) - perspectives: given the three previous parts, what are the implications/horizons/possible directions to proceed? [too many different perspectives to be worth listing]

The idea would be to try and appropriate as much as possible from already existing texts rather than to write new ones.

A useful byproduct of this work would be a list of the different groups active in these areas, the level of their operations (grassroots, institutional etc) and the resources they dispose of.

Objectives

Apart from the content element, the work would have two objects:

(1) - in the different local/linguistic areas of europe (and beyond) these themes have been under discussion for quite some time. in each case there is a different background/emphasis. There is an inability to create a common discussion in part due to the barriers of language. The first key part would be the translation of sections of texts from the various 'local situations' into as many languages as possible. The idea being that eventually we would have a common set of materials existing in multiple languages. It may seem mad but when i think of Oekonux(Germany)/Hipatia(Argentina/Latin America/Iberian Peninsula)/Hacklabs-operaismo(Italy)/capitalisme cognitive (french)/empirical work done in english etc.

There seem to be a lot of similarities and an inadequate level of exchange. As a result there is a lot of time and effort wasted as the same themes are discussed in different contexts without even the benefits of those differing approaches being enjoyed.

(2) At the same time we are faced with an adversary on a european level which is united.

- this process could help to build up a tissue of relationships ultimately capable of acting in future conflicts. Like when the first individual is sued for file-sharing. or when the first person is charged criminally. And unfortunately in the first case i expect that to happen any time now.

-------

Building Participation My proposal is to ask that collaborators present the proposal at all relevant meetings in the next months (Telestreet Conference/Italian Hackmeeting/Hipatia days/Jornadas Copyleft/ Oekonux 3/Free Bitflows/Wizards of OS) whilst actually initiating the work. Apart from these physical events we would of course use the existing mailing lists (hacklabs, hackmeeting, indy, independent collectives etc) to gather those interested.

A first presentation of the work in progress would be made in Pula, Croatia, during the Transnational HackMeeting, but obviously it would be a work in progress. If the thing is decent - and it should be - it ought not be difficult to find publishers in different languages, but this would obviously be left up to those wanting to take responsibility for it and wouldn't be a core part of the project aims.

Output

Rather than laying down a rule for a final product, the idea would be to set it up clearly so that it was modular. if we're clear about this from the beginning, it should be possible to continue with the work even in case of serious disagreements [license, agreement on method of presentation of project in public, collective 'author' list based on labour and providing the option to disassociate from individual sections]

Maintainer-groups might be useful for looking after sections, languages etc.

Request for Comments Your thoughts and criticisms are requested :-)

I've already spoken with several people about it informally and some 'get' the utility of the proposition immediately. Do you?

Is it too vague? I don't want to occupy the center in this so I'm hoping that leaving it open will enable people to take it and develop it as theirs.

Or is it too defined, creating stupid limitations and exclusions?

What guidelines/structures need to be developed from the beginning so as to anticipate potential conflicts/forks/other problems?

If such a project is not relevant to the work you are doing, why is that?

Opening Elements

1. Four pillar structure

2. Group memory

3. Decision-making and divergence.

4. Questions left open in the project description.

5. Where does the explanatory meet the engagement?