“Those who want information to be free as a matter of principle should
create some information and make it free.” – Nicholas Petreley
All quotes and images from other sources are copyright their respective owners, but any content original to 23AE.com is public domain, unless specifically stated otherwise by the author. Do with it what you like, but please attribute properly.
If you do not agree with the KopyLeft principle, please do not add posts or comments to this website without specifying your copyright.
KopyLeft ensures the widest dissemination of information. We disagree with the way that copyright and patent law in the United States and around the world is unceasingly modified and broadened due to lobbying by corporations such as Disney and organizations such as the MPAA. It is ludicrous and inexcusable to equate copyright infringement with terrorism, as MPAA president Jack Valenti did, and we want no part of that mindset.
Copyright laws were originally created to ensure that creators benefited from their works, but current laws favor publishers and corporations, not the individual artist. Public domain allows works to become integral parts of other works – Alice in Wonderland is a good example. It has been borrowed from by thousands of artists for thousands of reasons, and because of this, the story has lived on and grown with us to the point of becoming archetypical. This is not possible with works that are still under copyright for obvious reasons.
In the information age, our cultural heritage has gone global. Scheherazade’s work is almost as much a part of our cultural heritage as Shakespeare and Carroll. Innovations and enhancements on all of their works enrich the scope and power of the original to inform our global culture and provide a familiar framework for the innovator to work within. For Eris’ sake, even weather data is under strict copyright – the National Weather Service is limited on what weather data it is allowed to provide free on its website, since the private sector owns pieces of the information.
I find it especially disappointing that the company that has benefited most from information in the public domain is leading the fight to keep their versions of those public domain works under strict copyright. Creators should certainly profit from their works, but when the creator and their spouse are dead, what right does a corporation have to the intellectual property, especially for such an extended amount of time?
Obviously, the answer to this is that they have the right of political influence and graft in the form of campaign contributions. Since we can do nothing about these misguided souls, we have KopyLefted our material. It isn’t Shakespeare, but it’s the best we can do. What do you think of that, Petreley?
UPDATE Aug 01, 2005
It seems that this “Creative Commons” idea is taking off now, and it is certainly a step in the right direction… but… “Some rights reserved?” And blah blah legal code? No, sorry. Not for us. Instead of the Creative Commons image
I suggest the following Kopyleft image
If you like it, feel free to use it in any way you wish. If you want a snazzy page you can link it to, detailing the myriad of ways the user can use your data (In a blender, on a bender, in a sink, on their dink…) send some suggestions and I will make a K page we can all link to.
For those of you who are traditionalists, here is an image of the old Kopyleft I was using: 
Also, read Eric Flint’s Essay on the success Baen has had posting books online. Although they still enjoy full copyright protection, this is one more illustration that copyright holders are overreacting to the availability of their material online.
