Re: [ARSCLIST] The Incxmpxtxncx at ENHS

[David Lewis <davlew@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Say can we remove or alter the word "incompetence" from this subject line if
we are going to continue to post to this thread? Whether "incompetent" or
not, ENHS is a public institution that is part of the National Park Service,
and deserves acknowledgement for what it is in equal measure to any scrutiny
it may, or may not, have earned.

David N. Lewis
Assistant Classical Editor, All Music Guide
1168 Oak Valley Dr.
Ann Arbor, MI 48108
734 887 8145
 
"Music expresses what one cannot say, but about which one cannot remain
silent." - Victor Hugo

-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Karl Miller
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:34 AM
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] The Incompetence at ENHS

On Fri, 27 Oct 2006, James L Wolf wrote:

> I can understand frustration about the government's inability to put up
sound
recordings on the web. The issue of whether something is public-domain or
not is one
I run into constantly. Institutional and staffing problems at any given
facility do
not mean that there is a lack of desire to share treasures with the public,
but
rather that there are any number of greater forces that can make this
impossible at
times.

I believe that there are degrees of desired and some fundamentally
differing perspectives.

> And I know that seemingly eternal "copyright" on sound recordings is a
concern of
many people here. Some, especially Sam Brylawski and Tim Brooks, have done
tremendous
work to explore every legal option for making recordings available and to
try to
change the laws to reflect a more sensible balance between public and
private
interests. There is a cause and a time for rage against the "system." But
the better
approach is to support and continue the positive work that has been done.

For me, the status quo is not only inhibiting to education and research, I
see it as a civil rights issue. Perhaps libraries should refuse to
preserve any unique recordings unless they can have the right to
distribute them at a fair price, with a percentage going to the copyright
holders.

I really do see the current situation forcing libraries and archives to
compromise their mission of providing access. Many already compromise
preservation due to either lack of funding or misuse, or misappropriation
of funding.

I realize these can be very complex issues, especially in
bureaucracies, but, as complex as the issues of the law and the allocation
of fiscal resources might be, if one shares the notion that there is a
"right" to access information when that information can be seen as being
for the common good, then there can be some fundamental right that is left
being denied.

Coca Cola, by not placing a patent on their "formula," and keeping their
"secret" to themselves, have been able to maintain their distinctive taste
well past
any patent limits.  Conversely, a drug company can spend huge amounts of
money to
develop a drug, yet they do not own the "formula" in perpetuity, and it
would
likely be known to the scientific community...to aid in further research.

For me, the laws suggest that we think of recorded sound, and the arts in
general, like we think of coca cola.


Karl