I recommend that all government executive officers, in particular those in human resource management jobs, should read the newly published 2008 Report of the Public Service Commission. The main function of the Commission is to watch and query government human resource management work. The most affected party is the group of government executive officers in such postings.
The report highlights the work of the Commission in 2008 and presents observations in areas requiring improvements. In other words, the report provides valuable hints on what the Commission is looking for and what not to do by government human resource managers. There are a few areas in this report which I find particularly interesting.
Upon the resumption of civil service recruitment, and in view of the recent economy downturn, many human resource managers find that the number of job seekers for government jobs has increased tremendously. Any advertisement of vacancy will attract a lot of, or far too many, candidates. It is a headache on how to select suitable candidates for appointment, or just how to select candidates for interview. The golden rule is to interview five candidates for one vacancy. Many departments has opted to interview ten or more candidates for each vacancy. Still, the number of qualified candidates is too much that shortlisting criteria must be applied to keep the number of candidates invited for interview manageable. Such shortlisting criteria are under the scrutiny of the Commission.
Normally, managers will select for interview candidates with either better academic achievements or better working experience or both. The Commission considers that some fresh graduates may also have good potential for appointment. Such shortlisting criteria will screen them out and should not be allowed. So what to do with the thousands of candidates. The Commission recommends the conducting of recruitment examination as a way of shortlisting. It is an additional resource consuming task for many recruitment exercises. Also, the Commission recommends the conducting of primary interview. This means that all qualified candidates are invited for a first round interview with a view to selecting the good ones for a second round interview. Just think the amount of resources required.
Another query is the special treatment to disabled candidates in recruitment examination. If the examination is meant to shortlist candidates, then disabled candidates must be interviewed even if they fail in the recruitment examination. Just imagine a disabled candidate not meeting the standard of recruitment examination; could their performance be considered on par with other suitable candidates? I am not sure if the EORE is a shortlisting examination or a qualifying examination as the content of the examination is much duty related.
I am happy to see that the report proposes the strengthening of staff performance management system. On reading, it seems the proposals are timely completion of appraisals, time conducting of promotion, timely implementation of career posting. All these are not strengthening the system, but just correction to the poor implementation of the existing system by the bureaucrats. The only good suggestion is the tightening of appraisal standard through training. This is the core of the issue. Only with an honest appraising officer can the appraisal report reflects the truth. All other steps such as comments by third parties including reviewing officer, departmental secretary, head of grade are taking the appraisal further away from the truth. The Commission highly recommends the convening of assessment panel on appraisals. It is another step to degrade the process to collective responsibility. In a department I worked which had assessment panel, the performance gradings of all officers were dictated by the chairman of the panel. Another phenomenon observed by the Commission is the overly graded or overly harsh appraisals. It is such observation that causes appraising officers to write reports which are similar, because any grade A or grade D report will create much trouble which the appraising officer has to defend.
Lastly there is the recommendation on streamlining of disciplinary procedures. However, it is only on a very special case where an officer was disciplined both under section 9 for not reporting criminal conviction, and then under section 11 for the criminal conviction. The cumbersome disciplinary procedures have not been streamlined. I hope the recent court case of no legal representative in disciplinary inquiry could kick start another streamlining exercise.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
復活節的反思
蘋果日報在4月17日有下面一篇評論，作者是旅美學者，文章所指的是美國近況。美國主流宗教是基督教，或可稱非天主教。但美國基督教百花齊放，亦可以說亂作一團，和羅馬天主教由教宗統領，下面一層層官僚架構有所不同。文中所說福音教派和傳統大老，並不是一個組織。美國每個州至每個郡都有自己教派，規模和影響力各有不同，但它們的取向並不一致。文中提及的政治和道德觀點，在各教派中不斷有爭論，其中更有很多極端和原教旨教義。以聖經為例，有些教派有自己的經書，並禁止教友讀聖經。
基督教在美國的重要性深入民心。有一位同事要移民美國，在送行的聚會中大家討論移民安頓的問題。他有充滿信心的想法，就是到達後第一時間搞清楚當地社區信奉那一個基督教派，然後入教參與週日祟拜，以便迅速溶入社群。我覺得他有點另有用心，就如其他人使用基督教以謀取利益、政治本錢或作商業行為一樣。不過種種俗世的目的，和靈修不一樣，亦可以說是存在於不同的領域。
作者說宗教在美國的情況和歐洲比較已算很好。我上網四處找找歐洲的現況，發覺在歐盟國家中信神的人 (不一定是基督教) 只有52%。在2005年有一個調查，找出歐洲各國信神的人口百分比。低於50%人口信神的國家由低至更低依次是瑞士、德國、盧森堡、匈牙利、比利時、芬蘭、保加利亞、冰島、英國、拉脫維亞、斯洛文尼亞、法國、荷蘭、挪威、丹麥、瑞典、捷克、愛沙尼亞。其中英國低至38%，而法國和荷蘭更低至34%。安慰的是意大利尚有74%人口信神，而最神心是土耳其人，有95%，但他們是信奉伊斯蘭教。在2007-2008年，歐洲有另一項調查，問各國人民宗教對他們的重要性，其結果和2005年的調查結果相符。
如果同類調查在香港進行結果會是怎樣呢？我估計香港深受英國影響，而又更深受中國各種傳統宗教影響，信神的人口應該比英國的38%為高。
**********
復活節的反思
殷惠敏 文化時事評論員
蘋果日報 2009-04-17
上周五耶穌受難日，美國華爾街照例休市一天。周末小孫女的斯洛伐克籍保母教她做復活節彩蛋，一個個色彩晶瑩的彩蛋繫在小樹枝上，帶來節慶的氣氛。關於耶穌 復活和彩蛋的傳奇，一般人已不甚了了。一個古老的說法是為遺體擦拭和守靈，並且親眼見到耶穌復活的女門徒，給羅馬的地區行政長官叫去問話。行政長官輕蔑地 指着一個蛋說，人死而能復活，就像這個蛋能變色一樣，這是可能的嗎？據說女門徒一言不發地拿起了蛋，她手中的蛋竟神奇地發出彩色的光。
- 無宗教人口漸增
復活節彩蛋，固然令人賞心悅目，但美國的教會領袖現在卻為基督教的前途感到憂心忡忡。最新的宗教調查顯示，自認沒有任何宗教的美國人，在過去十年，增加了一倍。這個趨勢若繼續下去，則擁有七成五基督徒人口的「基督教美國」，可能就要發生質變。教會領袖最擔心的是，美國遲早會步向「無神的歐洲」之途。目前美國上教堂的人口之多，在先進的工業國中，已是一個異數。奧巴馬上台後在全民健保、社福、教育方面的「大政府」政策，事實上已開始接近歐洲國家的特點。人民 如果不必生活在恒常的恐懼之中，為醫療和工作保障等問題擔憂，是否就會像歐洲人那樣，不需尋求宗教的慰藉？這樣一來，美國歷史上引以為傲，且被社會學家視 為資本主義原動力的敬天勤奮的「清教徒精神」，是否就要消失了？這個問題外人也許難以理解，但調查顯示的不信神人口，從過去聚集的美國西北部轉移到東北 部，卻令教會高層擔憂，因為東北部正是代表美國傳統的五月花號移民的發源地。當然，若說美國已步上一個「後基督」的國度，也許言之過早，但教會在政治與文 化上的影響力式微，卻是個不爭的事實。自認是無神論或不可知論的美國人，過去二十年來，人數雖然增加了四倍，但也不到四百萬人，佔人口比例極小。
- 政教分離受侵犯
值得注意的是去年大選中，自認沒有宗教依附（並非不信神）的人，百分之七十五都把票投給奧巴馬。這似乎反映出兩黨都要爭取的中間選民，對主流教會的反感。 尤其是財雄勢大的基督教福音教派，被保守的傳統大老把持，把頭埋在沙堆裏，拒絕承認威脅人類生存的地球暖化與能源等問題，認為上帝自有安排。他們把愛滋病 在非洲的蔓延視為天譴，也無視於同移民問題相關的貧窮與社會公義，眼裏緊盯的是同性戀、墮胎、同性婚姻等所謂「核心價值」議題。另一方面，他們又堅持以聖 經原則來詮釋政治社會生活的立場，反對公立學校講授達爾文進化論，結果難免陷入荒謬可笑的境地。今日美國無疑仍是一個基督的國度。但布殊八年教會對「政教 分離」原則的侵犯，使得美國的政治生活上演着一幕幕荒謬偽善的鬧劇。對政界和宗教界來說，這是應該引以為戒的。
***********
基督教在美國的重要性深入民心。有一位同事要移民美國，在送行的聚會中大家討論移民安頓的問題。他有充滿信心的想法，就是到達後第一時間搞清楚當地社區信奉那一個基督教派，然後入教參與週日祟拜，以便迅速溶入社群。我覺得他有點另有用心，就如其他人使用基督教以謀取利益、政治本錢或作商業行為一樣。不過種種俗世的目的，和靈修不一樣，亦可以說是存在於不同的領域。
作者說宗教在美國的情況和歐洲比較已算很好。我上網四處找找歐洲的現況，發覺在歐盟國家中信神的人 (不一定是基督教) 只有52%。在2005年有一個調查，找出歐洲各國信神的人口百分比。低於50%人口信神的國家由低至更低依次是瑞士、德國、盧森堡、匈牙利、比利時、芬蘭、保加利亞、冰島、英國、拉脫維亞、斯洛文尼亞、法國、荷蘭、挪威、丹麥、瑞典、捷克、愛沙尼亞。其中英國低至38%，而法國和荷蘭更低至34%。安慰的是意大利尚有74%人口信神，而最神心是土耳其人，有95%，但他們是信奉伊斯蘭教。在2007-2008年，歐洲有另一項調查，問各國人民宗教對他們的重要性，其結果和2005年的調查結果相符。
如果同類調查在香港進行結果會是怎樣呢？我估計香港深受英國影響，而又更深受中國各種傳統宗教影響，信神的人口應該比英國的38%為高。
**********
復活節的反思
殷惠敏 文化時事評論員
蘋果日報 2009-04-17
上周五耶穌受難日，美國華爾街照例休市一天。周末小孫女的斯洛伐克籍保母教她做復活節彩蛋，一個個色彩晶瑩的彩蛋繫在小樹枝上，帶來節慶的氣氛。關於耶穌 復活和彩蛋的傳奇，一般人已不甚了了。一個古老的說法是為遺體擦拭和守靈，並且親眼見到耶穌復活的女門徒，給羅馬的地區行政長官叫去問話。行政長官輕蔑地 指着一個蛋說，人死而能復活，就像這個蛋能變色一樣，這是可能的嗎？據說女門徒一言不發地拿起了蛋，她手中的蛋竟神奇地發出彩色的光。
- 無宗教人口漸增
復活節彩蛋，固然令人賞心悅目，但美國的教會領袖現在卻為基督教的前途感到憂心忡忡。最新的宗教調查顯示，自認沒有任何宗教的美國人，在過去十年，增加了一倍。這個趨勢若繼續下去，則擁有七成五基督徒人口的「基督教美國」，可能就要發生質變。教會領袖最擔心的是，美國遲早會步向「無神的歐洲」之途。目前美國上教堂的人口之多，在先進的工業國中，已是一個異數。奧巴馬上台後在全民健保、社福、教育方面的「大政府」政策，事實上已開始接近歐洲國家的特點。人民 如果不必生活在恒常的恐懼之中，為醫療和工作保障等問題擔憂，是否就會像歐洲人那樣，不需尋求宗教的慰藉？這樣一來，美國歷史上引以為傲，且被社會學家視 為資本主義原動力的敬天勤奮的「清教徒精神」，是否就要消失了？這個問題外人也許難以理解，但調查顯示的不信神人口，從過去聚集的美國西北部轉移到東北 部，卻令教會高層擔憂，因為東北部正是代表美國傳統的五月花號移民的發源地。當然，若說美國已步上一個「後基督」的國度，也許言之過早，但教會在政治與文 化上的影響力式微，卻是個不爭的事實。自認是無神論或不可知論的美國人，過去二十年來，人數雖然增加了四倍，但也不到四百萬人，佔人口比例極小。
- 政教分離受侵犯
值得注意的是去年大選中，自認沒有宗教依附（並非不信神）的人，百分之七十五都把票投給奧巴馬。這似乎反映出兩黨都要爭取的中間選民，對主流教會的反感。 尤其是財雄勢大的基督教福音教派，被保守的傳統大老把持，把頭埋在沙堆裏，拒絕承認威脅人類生存的地球暖化與能源等問題，認為上帝自有安排。他們把愛滋病 在非洲的蔓延視為天譴，也無視於同移民問題相關的貧窮與社會公義，眼裏緊盯的是同性戀、墮胎、同性婚姻等所謂「核心價值」議題。另一方面，他們又堅持以聖 經原則來詮釋政治社會生活的立場，反對公立學校講授達爾文進化論，結果難免陷入荒謬可笑的境地。今日美國無疑仍是一個基督的國度。但布殊八年教會對「政教 分離」原則的侵犯，使得美國的政治生活上演着一幕幕荒謬偽善的鬧劇。對政界和宗教界來說，這是應該引以為戒的。
***********
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Is it safe?
Many people ask the million dollar question all the time: Is it safe to download software from the Internet? There are so many wonderful software to be downloaded. However, they are also a major source of security breaches. How can we have the best of both worlds, downloading useful software but being immune to malicious ones. Recently, I read an article on CNN on this topic. You may wish to read the full article for the expert advice.
The author said surfing the Internet is like going for a walk in the woods. It is similar to what I said before that it is like walking in a busy street. He said it would be wise to venture forth with a clear idea of what poison ivy looks like in comparison to, say, sunflowers. Software is just code. Some of it is written well, some of it is written poorly, and some of it is written well to do poor things (and vice versa). In other words, software is only as good as its author, that author's intentions, and the application of those intentions to a given purpose.
Generally speaking, software from reputable sources should be relatively benign. A site like CNET's download.com, with links from big-name sources and well-written, in-depth reviews with detailed system requirements and clear notice of whether a piece of software was scanned for malware or not, is likely to be safe. Search the Internet for what other people are saying about the software in question. Seeing where it is hosted can give you some clues. If you can find evidence of the software being hosted by or linked from sites you trust, then the odds are good that it is probably okay.
Guard against forced download. If your browser tells you that you need to install something in order to view a web page. Check carefully before doing so. Only respond to trusted services like Adobe Flash, and make sure you are directed to its official link. Be very careful on software that has been pirated or cracked. Most likely malicious code has been inserted.
Do not assume that non-Windows operating systems (like Linux or Apple) are safe from the threat of a potential security breach. Although most unscrupulous malware programmers target Windows, other operating systems are equally vulnerable.
Make sure you have always got security software running and keeping it updated.
If you are totally paranoid and want to avoid downloading altogether, there are now services on the Internet on cloud computing. Software can be run directly online from trusted sites of service providers. Google Docs is a good example. More application service providers are coming up.
The author said surfing the Internet is like going for a walk in the woods. It is similar to what I said before that it is like walking in a busy street. He said it would be wise to venture forth with a clear idea of what poison ivy looks like in comparison to, say, sunflowers. Software is just code. Some of it is written well, some of it is written poorly, and some of it is written well to do poor things (and vice versa). In other words, software is only as good as its author, that author's intentions, and the application of those intentions to a given purpose.
Generally speaking, software from reputable sources should be relatively benign. A site like CNET's download.com, with links from big-name sources and well-written, in-depth reviews with detailed system requirements and clear notice of whether a piece of software was scanned for malware or not, is likely to be safe. Search the Internet for what other people are saying about the software in question. Seeing where it is hosted can give you some clues. If you can find evidence of the software being hosted by or linked from sites you trust, then the odds are good that it is probably okay.
Guard against forced download. If your browser tells you that you need to install something in order to view a web page. Check carefully before doing so. Only respond to trusted services like Adobe Flash, and make sure you are directed to its official link. Be very careful on software that has been pirated or cracked. Most likely malicious code has been inserted.
Do not assume that non-Windows operating systems (like Linux or Apple) are safe from the threat of a potential security breach. Although most unscrupulous malware programmers target Windows, other operating systems are equally vulnerable.
Make sure you have always got security software running and keeping it updated.
If you are totally paranoid and want to avoid downloading altogether, there are now services on the Internet on cloud computing. Software can be run directly online from trusted sites of service providers. Google Docs is a good example. More application service providers are coming up.
Monday, April 20, 2009
David Garrett 與柴可夫斯基
上週末一連三天馬拉松式聽音樂會，主要是聽 David Garrett與柴可夫斯基。他們究竟有什麼關係？答案是沒有關係。David Garrett並非演奏柴可夫斯基的音樂，只不過港樂和小交連續兩晚分別演出柴三和柴五交響曲，而 David Garrett來港又一連兩晚有不同曲目的音樂會。因緣際會，忽然變得十分忙碌。
柴可夫斯基的交響曲好聽又易聽，但大家的注意力都集中在他後期的四至六三首。他的第三交響曲其實亦十分好聽，在曲式方面亦已完全是典型柴氏風格。我尤其喜歡第一樂章引子與快板，肅穆的主題加上木管的輕巧，就像柴可夫斯基悲情的性格。最終樂章應該是高潮，但比較他的後期交響曲卻有點遜色。星期六聽小交奏柴五感想更加良好。小交近年進步不少，近期數次聽它的音樂會都覺得水準不錯。柴五本身是非常出色的作品，就像一顆出土時已顯露出優點的寶石，不需刻意琢磨已可發出光輝。樂團如果有規模，而演奏時沒有大錯漏，聽眾就一定滿意。它的第四樂章營造的激情，是柴氏各交響曲中寫得最有效果的一段。
三場音樂會的主角都是小提琴。和港樂合作的是 Julian Rachlin，演奏浦羅哥菲夫的G小調第二小提琴協奏曲。Rachlin來頭不少，他選奏這首樂曲技巧難度甚高，而樂曲本身在欣賞時亦有難度，但比較其他浦羅哥菲夫的作品已算溫和。週六和週日的音樂會就以 David Garrett為主角，因為他近年走紅之故，兩場音樂會都全場滿座。
週六的音樂會他演奏布魯赫的 G小調第一小提琴協奏曲。這首名曲百聽不厭，但他拉出來別有一番味道。我覺得他的演繹在速度上放慢了一點，旋律聽起來更加清晰，樂思亦更抒情；在快速的段落很多細節都清楚表達。我有點奇怪他選擇這樣演繹，我以為以他著名高超的技巧，他會選擇用一個較快的速度。週日的音樂會是一個愉快的場合。曲目適合年青人欣賞，有 Peer Gynt Suite 和 Carmen Suite。David Garrett 演出他的拿手好戲，都是他的暢銷唱片的選曲，是他特別改編的古典音樂精華，有 Hungarian Dance No. 5, Humoresque和 Csardas。現場氣氛熱烈，他亦毫不吝嗇，encore四次。
柴可夫斯基的交響曲好聽又易聽，但大家的注意力都集中在他後期的四至六三首。他的第三交響曲其實亦十分好聽，在曲式方面亦已完全是典型柴氏風格。我尤其喜歡第一樂章引子與快板，肅穆的主題加上木管的輕巧，就像柴可夫斯基悲情的性格。最終樂章應該是高潮，但比較他的後期交響曲卻有點遜色。星期六聽小交奏柴五感想更加良好。小交近年進步不少，近期數次聽它的音樂會都覺得水準不錯。柴五本身是非常出色的作品，就像一顆出土時已顯露出優點的寶石，不需刻意琢磨已可發出光輝。樂團如果有規模，而演奏時沒有大錯漏，聽眾就一定滿意。它的第四樂章營造的激情，是柴氏各交響曲中寫得最有效果的一段。
三場音樂會的主角都是小提琴。和港樂合作的是 Julian Rachlin，演奏浦羅哥菲夫的G小調第二小提琴協奏曲。Rachlin來頭不少，他選奏這首樂曲技巧難度甚高，而樂曲本身在欣賞時亦有難度，但比較其他浦羅哥菲夫的作品已算溫和。週六和週日的音樂會就以 David Garrett為主角，因為他近年走紅之故，兩場音樂會都全場滿座。
週六的音樂會他演奏布魯赫的 G小調第一小提琴協奏曲。這首名曲百聽不厭，但他拉出來別有一番味道。我覺得他的演繹在速度上放慢了一點，旋律聽起來更加清晰，樂思亦更抒情；在快速的段落很多細節都清楚表達。我有點奇怪他選擇這樣演繹，我以為以他著名高超的技巧，他會選擇用一個較快的速度。週日的音樂會是一個愉快的場合。曲目適合年青人欣賞，有 Peer Gynt Suite 和 Carmen Suite。David Garrett 演出他的拿手好戲，都是他的暢銷唱片的選曲，是他特別改編的古典音樂精華，有 Hungarian Dance No. 5, Humoresque和 Csardas。現場氣氛熱烈，他亦毫不吝嗇，encore四次。
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Religious images 宗教影像
神是無所不在，至少在概念上是如此。在宗教立場，神在現實裡也是無所不在。如果信仰很堅定，在日常生活裡四處都會看見宗教影像，這是 seeing is believing 的反義。英國電訊報就收集了一批著名的宗教影像，以供讀者作為警惕。
一位匹茲堡居民家裡的浴缸旁邊灰泥的水漬竟然呈現耶穌像。我看來覺得完全不相似，但這塊灰泥被放上 eBay 拍賣，以2,000美元售出。
2003年6月，波士頓密爾頓醫療中心一個雙層玻璃窗戶因水蒸氣凝結而顯露出聖母像。群眾蜂擁而至觀看。
在澳洲愛得萊德一個停車場，有街燈在樹後面投射的影子被為是耶穌的影像。當地居民每晚都聚集觀看。
一塊焗芝士多士現出聖母形象。這件多士在2004年11月以28,000美元售出。其實多焗幾塊多士始終會見到聖母，不過很難再有人以28,000美元 買。
在2005年，英國薩西克斯郡上空雲層出現耶穌被釘十字架像。
美國太空總署於2002年4月發表哈勃太空望遠鏡拍到的圓錐星雲照片。很多人說是耶穌出現在太空。
約翰保祿二世剪影出現在火堆。根據攝影師口供，這張照片是在2007年4月2日，即約翰保祿二世逝世兩週年在波蘭拍攝。時間是晚上9時37分，正是他逝世的時間。
"修女飽"。田納西州一間咖啡店做了一個飽，發覺竟然是德蘭修女的形象；咖啡店因而出名。但此飽後來被人偷去。
1996年12月，數百人在佛羅里達州清水鎮圍觀玻璃上的聖母像。這個聖母像有可能不時都會出現，不過身形應該次次不同。
啤酒杯上的耶穌。這個耶穌像大家都公認是假的，因為它是由教會一手造成的，作廣告宣傳之用。
一位匹茲堡居民家裡的浴缸旁邊灰泥的水漬竟然呈現耶穌像。我看來覺得完全不相似，但這塊灰泥被放上 eBay 拍賣，以2,000美元售出。
2003年6月，波士頓密爾頓醫療中心一個雙層玻璃窗戶因水蒸氣凝結而顯露出聖母像。群眾蜂擁而至觀看。
在澳洲愛得萊德一個停車場，有街燈在樹後面投射的影子被為是耶穌的影像。當地居民每晚都聚集觀看。
一塊焗芝士多士現出聖母形象。這件多士在2004年11月以28,000美元售出。其實多焗幾塊多士始終會見到聖母，不過很難再有人以28,000美元 買。
在2005年，英國薩西克斯郡上空雲層出現耶穌被釘十字架像。
美國太空總署於2002年4月發表哈勃太空望遠鏡拍到的圓錐星雲照片。很多人說是耶穌出現在太空。
約翰保祿二世剪影出現在火堆。根據攝影師口供，這張照片是在2007年4月2日，即約翰保祿二世逝世兩週年在波蘭拍攝。時間是晚上9時37分，正是他逝世的時間。
"修女飽"。田納西州一間咖啡店做了一個飽，發覺竟然是德蘭修女的形象；咖啡店因而出名。但此飽後來被人偷去。
1996年12月，數百人在佛羅里達州清水鎮圍觀玻璃上的聖母像。這個聖母像有可能不時都會出現，不過身形應該次次不同。
啤酒杯上的耶穌。這個耶穌像大家都公認是假的，因為它是由教會一手造成的，作廣告宣傳之用。
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Free Culture
Free Culture
The Nature and Future of Creativity
by Lawrence Lessig
The author of the book, Lawrence Lessig, is a professor of law at Stanford Law School. He is a crusader for reduced legal restrictions on copyright, trademark, and radio frequency spectrum, particularly in technology applications. He is well known for representing Eldred in the case Eldred v Ashcroft where he fought in the US Supreme Court that the numerous extensions of copyright duration by the US Congress was unconstitutional. He explained the case in details in the book and admitted his mistake. He argued that the extension was unconstitutional because the Constitution has a clause on limited time of copyright, and that repeated extension would render copyright with no time limit. He regretted that he did not take the advice of his legal partners that the case should be presented to the Supreme Court highlighting the harm done to free culture owing to unending copyright. A mere academic explanation of the letters of the Constitution was not sufficient to impress the Supreme Court. As a result of such copyright extensions, the public domain of publications has ceased to expand since 1923.
With regard to property right, he cited the case of Causbys. The Causbys sued the US government of allowing airplanes to fly over their farm. The Causbys argued that the property right of their land would include the space above it, and that the government was trespassing on their property. In 1945, the Supreme Court ruled to uphold the decision of the Congress with a simple statement that "Common sense revolts at the idea". As such, hundreds of years of property right was erased. Lessig likened this case to the numerous extensions of copyright duration. The unlimited copyright duration has led to all published materials: books, music, films, to be excluded from the public domain forever. Common sense should revolt at this idea as well. Free culture, free as in freedom not free lunch, is threatened as copyright could restrain all adaptations of published materials.
Lessig explained in details the origin, history and trend of the copyright issue. One topic which I am quite interested, and which deeply affects the Internet, is the downloading of files, in particular the peer-to-peer, P2P, file sharing technology which enables fast transmission and copying of digital files. A strong lobby comprising book publishers, music recording companies and movie companies are seeking strong enforcement power on the transmission of copyright materials on the Internet. The most advanced technology in the dissemination of knowledge is being restrained, as well as the free culture.
On file sharing, Lessig divided them into four types by the content shared:
Type A. Some people use sharing networks as substitutes for purchasing content. Although it is arguable whether everyone who takes content this way would actually have bought it if sharing didn't make it available for free, there are some who would, thus depriving the legitimate sale of copyright content.
Type B. Some people use sharing networks to sample content before purchasing it. This is a kind of target advertising which is quite likely to succeed. The net effect of this sharing could increase the quantity of content purchased.
Type C. There are many who use sharing networks to get access to copyrighted content that is no longer sold. For content not sold, there is still technically a violation of copyright, although because the copyright owner is not selling the content anymore, the economic harm is zero.
Type D. There are many who use sharing networks to get access to content that is not copyrighted or that the copyright owner wants to give away.
Only type D sharing is clearly legal from the perspective of the law. If viewed from the perspective of economics, only type A sharing is harmful. Type B is illegal but beneficial to the owner. Type C is illegal yet good for the society. Any reform of the law and enforcement actions should take all these into account. They must avoid burdening type D even if it aims to eliminate type A. They should also consider the magnitude of type B and assess the actual harm done against the benefits gained. Instead of vigorously putting off all file sharing activities, Lessig suggested a model that could solve the problem and satisfy all parties. First, there should be a register of copyright materials. This would establish a clear legal status of copyright so that people wishing to use copyright materials could have a clear channel to seek permission. Second, there should be a definite duration of copyright to enable owners to receive their fair share of benefits. Third, such duration could be reasonably extended for those with continued value. Materials which their owners would wish to surrender copyright, or with expired copyright could enter the public domain for either free sharing or be used at a nominal cost. At present, these proposals are fiercely resisted by the interest parties who wish copyright to be forever.
Notwithstanding the impasse, there are clear signs that the present struggle of file copying and file sharing on the Internet is only temporary. The Internet is quickly moving into its next phase of fast connection speed and perpetual availability. Broadband connection is now widely used, and its speed is expected to be further enhanced. Fibre-optic connection and wireless connection are making Internet access more convenient and virtually always available. There are at present many websites offering online on-the-fly music listening, movie viewing and electronic book reading. There will soon be no need for a user to download content from sharing networks as content is readily available any time we need. The freedom of using such knowledge and thus enabling a free culture is what Lessig is looking forward to.
The Nature and Future of Creativity
by Lawrence Lessig
The author of the book, Lawrence Lessig, is a professor of law at Stanford Law School. He is a crusader for reduced legal restrictions on copyright, trademark, and radio frequency spectrum, particularly in technology applications. He is well known for representing Eldred in the case Eldred v Ashcroft where he fought in the US Supreme Court that the numerous extensions of copyright duration by the US Congress was unconstitutional. He explained the case in details in the book and admitted his mistake. He argued that the extension was unconstitutional because the Constitution has a clause on limited time of copyright, and that repeated extension would render copyright with no time limit. He regretted that he did not take the advice of his legal partners that the case should be presented to the Supreme Court highlighting the harm done to free culture owing to unending copyright. A mere academic explanation of the letters of the Constitution was not sufficient to impress the Supreme Court. As a result of such copyright extensions, the public domain of publications has ceased to expand since 1923.
With regard to property right, he cited the case of Causbys. The Causbys sued the US government of allowing airplanes to fly over their farm. The Causbys argued that the property right of their land would include the space above it, and that the government was trespassing on their property. In 1945, the Supreme Court ruled to uphold the decision of the Congress with a simple statement that "Common sense revolts at the idea". As such, hundreds of years of property right was erased. Lessig likened this case to the numerous extensions of copyright duration. The unlimited copyright duration has led to all published materials: books, music, films, to be excluded from the public domain forever. Common sense should revolt at this idea as well. Free culture, free as in freedom not free lunch, is threatened as copyright could restrain all adaptations of published materials.
Lessig explained in details the origin, history and trend of the copyright issue. One topic which I am quite interested, and which deeply affects the Internet, is the downloading of files, in particular the peer-to-peer, P2P, file sharing technology which enables fast transmission and copying of digital files. A strong lobby comprising book publishers, music recording companies and movie companies are seeking strong enforcement power on the transmission of copyright materials on the Internet. The most advanced technology in the dissemination of knowledge is being restrained, as well as the free culture.
On file sharing, Lessig divided them into four types by the content shared:
Type A. Some people use sharing networks as substitutes for purchasing content. Although it is arguable whether everyone who takes content this way would actually have bought it if sharing didn't make it available for free, there are some who would, thus depriving the legitimate sale of copyright content.
Type B. Some people use sharing networks to sample content before purchasing it. This is a kind of target advertising which is quite likely to succeed. The net effect of this sharing could increase the quantity of content purchased.
Type C. There are many who use sharing networks to get access to copyrighted content that is no longer sold. For content not sold, there is still technically a violation of copyright, although because the copyright owner is not selling the content anymore, the economic harm is zero.
Type D. There are many who use sharing networks to get access to content that is not copyrighted or that the copyright owner wants to give away.
Only type D sharing is clearly legal from the perspective of the law. If viewed from the perspective of economics, only type A sharing is harmful. Type B is illegal but beneficial to the owner. Type C is illegal yet good for the society. Any reform of the law and enforcement actions should take all these into account. They must avoid burdening type D even if it aims to eliminate type A. They should also consider the magnitude of type B and assess the actual harm done against the benefits gained. Instead of vigorously putting off all file sharing activities, Lessig suggested a model that could solve the problem and satisfy all parties. First, there should be a register of copyright materials. This would establish a clear legal status of copyright so that people wishing to use copyright materials could have a clear channel to seek permission. Second, there should be a definite duration of copyright to enable owners to receive their fair share of benefits. Third, such duration could be reasonably extended for those with continued value. Materials which their owners would wish to surrender copyright, or with expired copyright could enter the public domain for either free sharing or be used at a nominal cost. At present, these proposals are fiercely resisted by the interest parties who wish copyright to be forever.
Notwithstanding the impasse, there are clear signs that the present struggle of file copying and file sharing on the Internet is only temporary. The Internet is quickly moving into its next phase of fast connection speed and perpetual availability. Broadband connection is now widely used, and its speed is expected to be further enhanced. Fibre-optic connection and wireless connection are making Internet access more convenient and virtually always available. There are at present many websites offering online on-the-fly music listening, movie viewing and electronic book reading. There will soon be no need for a user to download content from sharing networks as content is readily available any time we need. The freedom of using such knowledge and thus enabling a free culture is what Lessig is looking forward to.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)