The Outside by Mikko Rauhala

It's Ch... Newtonmas eve, time for sharing. But let's not get into that right now, I'll rather dig up something obscure from my mail archives.

You see, I found myself (again) recommending the Very Scary Solstice holiday song album (and related works) on IRC. Then, as I often do, I found myself needing to also point out the caveat that I had received some pretty ... interesting customer service from The H. P. Lovecraft Historical Society before in an unrelated matter. One remembers these things.

The long of it is in these few mails from years back. I still find I managed to put my words pretty well, if I do say so myself. A name has been removed to protect the clueless.

The short of it goes, I ask if the Call of Cthulhu DVD contains CSS, because as you might guess, I didn't want to support any DRM scheme by buying into it. I'll much rather break it (or let somebody else do it) and copy the stuff in that case. If the sellers don't have any respect for me, I don't have any for their purported "rights" either.

Lo and behold, the DVD is CSS-free, but the clerk decides to ask why, clearly implying there's something wrong with me. Well, I tell him why, and while he "respects my opinions", he also "smells greed and theft" and such. I throw back another mail where I tell him that he's not really doing a very good job at making me feel good about purchasing the movie, which is what I quite clearly originally set out to do.

In a transparent but honest effort to assert further moral high ground, I stated that I'll buy not one, but two, anyway (since a friend wanted one too), because my original question was satisfactorily answered. I waited a couple of days to give the clerk some time to insult me further and change my mind. He didn't, so I made the order — noting that I was kinda looking at some of the T-shirts and stuff too but the treatment by the sales people didn't encourage me to do so. I received a stock thank you note for the order from someone else, I think.

I did like the movie (which I thus far haven't copied to anyone), but the treatment I got left me a bit apprehensive about doing business with the outfit again. Which is a shame, 'cause I do like their music (which I haven't bought, but somehow seem to have in my possession regardless).

What do I hope to achieve here? I don't know, really. This is just another one of those little frustrating nagging feelings that wanted out, and the mail exchange was, at least to me, still somewhat strangely amusing. I don't really have anything against HPLHS, but this here's why I don't really feel comfortable recommending their otherwise neat wares. Of course I realize that this was only one of their sales people, but the attitude is not so uncommon among proprietors of information that I wouldn't dare presume that many, if not most involved with the HPLHS's creative work share these sentiments, even if they might not express them quite so inconsiderately in a sales situation as our hero. (But hey, if HPLHS cares to state a progressive official position, feel free!)

So, you know, if there's something to take away from this sorry excuse for a proper rant, it's this: Sales people around the world, don't start ethical arguments with interested buyers. It may affect your business for years to come.

PS: There's a new story. I won't even sneer at you if you copy it to your friends.

I've recently started a series of (quite) short stories where I tackle our current social issues in a more imaginative manner. So check it out if you like, erm, tales of brave futility and gratuitous cruelty of the sick and perverse variety. Somesuch things.

There's five of them there so far, let's see how long the motivation and the ideas last...

Myös lasten silpomista suosiva Suomen korkein oikeus totesi juuri, etteivät sananvapauden kaltaiset trivialiteetit kiinnosta sitä. Viesti poliitikoille on selvä: Suomessa sopii vastakin vapaasti rajoittaa perusoikeuksia kulkematta suotta perustuslain säätämisjärjestyksessä. Lex Nokian siunaamisesta tuoreeltaan tunnettu kansalaisoikeuksien vastustaja ja eduskunnan perustuslaintallomisvaliokunnan puheenjohtaja Kimmo Sasikin on epäilemättä tulokseen tyytyväinen.

Eli kysehän oli Organisoitu keskustelu -kampanjastani, jossa välitettiin teosten käyttöestojen kiertokeinoja, ja jonka joukkotunnustuksen kymmenistä allekirjoittaneista loppujen lopuksi kolme on saatettu teostaan oikeuden eteen ja niistä tuomittu. Missä viipyvät oikeustoimet loppuja vastaan? Perustuuko Suomen oikeuskäytäntö silmätikkujen ottamiseen? Eivätkö kansalaiset olekaan tasaveroisia lain edessä? Suomalaisten valitusasteiden loputtua kesken katse tietystikin hamuaa Eurooppaan, jossa olisi kuulemma ihmisoikeuksistakin kiinnostunut tuomioistuin, toisin kuin koto-Suomessa.

Ja entäpä kaikki muut, jotka julkisesti levittävät niinsanottujen suojakeinojen purkumetodeja? Effi suorastaan myy funktionaalisesti samansisältöisiä T-paitoja kuin mistä me jouduimme oikeuteen. Ei niin, että Effille kaipaisin lisää oikeudellisia ongelmia vastikään (toiseen kertaan) voitetun rahankeruujupakan jälkeen, mutta ei tämä nyt mikään salaisuuskaan ole! Vai oliko meidän syyttämisemme vain testikeissi, jonka turvin voidaan (taas) käydä hankalien kansalaisoikeusjärjestöjen kimppuun? Aika näyttänee.

Lopuksi, minä olen ehkä melko laillisesti huterassa asemassa pistämään juuri tästä aiheesta uusia kampanjoita pystyyn (vaikka kovasti mieli tekisi), mutta olisipa mielenkiintoista seurata, jos muutkin sananvapaudesta kiinnostuneet tahot nyt taas ajankohtaisesti sattuisivat — organisoidusti tai ei — WWW-sivuillaan tai muissa paikoissa julkaisemaan esim. juuri tämän lakijutun aiheena ollutta viestiä — tai jotain muuta vastaavia kiertokeinoja — sekä ilmiantamaan itseään ja/tai toisiaan tästä viranomaisille.

Lisäys: Unohtui tuossa muistuttaa hupaisana kuriositeettina, että kampanjan ohessa piruuttani heitin sekaan myös yhden ohjeen ihmisen tappamiseen. Tästä ei tietenkään kukaan älähtänyt mitään, joten voimme todeta, että DVD-levyjen katseluneston kiertäminen on paljon murhaa pahempi juttu. Hyvää työtä, lobbarit! Kiitos, eduskunta!

Australiassa on tuomittu mies lapsipornon hallussapidosta.

Piirretyn Simpsons-lapsipornon.

Asianmukainen reaktio täällä. Itsehän jo puhuin fiktiivisestä lapsipornosta (englanniksi) aiemmassa artikkelissani.

Onneksi Suomessa laki on ainakin toistaiseksi kirjoitettu järkevämmin. Tietystikään tämä ei välttämättä takaa mitään — älyllisesti epärehellisiä tulkintoja laeista on tehty ennenkin, eikä mahdollisuuksia järjen voitolle paranna hysteriaa aiheuttava aihe. Mutta hei, kokeillaan!

Liikaa muutakin paskaa viime aikoina tapahtunut kansalaisoikeusrintamalla nyt nipin napin sairaslomalta palanneena tarkkaan ruodittavaksi, mutta katsokaa Piraattipuolueen blogista iso lista. Ja jos haluatte tehdä jotain asialle, niin tilatkaa kannattajakortteja allekirjoitettavaksi nyt helposti nettilomakkeella. Palautuskuorikin kuuluu pakettiin.

Earlier I wrote an article prophetically titled "Due process not destroyed by media lobby yet" (emphasis added), praising the EU parliament of their decision not to allow cutting people's internet connections based on vague infringement accusations and without due process.

Thanks in great part to French president Sarkozy's great desire to lick big media ass as well as the spinelessness of the EU telecoms ministers in general, that's off the table now. I'm not an expert in EU law, so I don't know how final that is, but sheesh, people. We got 88% of the EU parliament behind sanity this time, but their will was summarily thrown out because we can't have big media have to go through courts to harass our citizens.

Can anybody claim with a straight face anymore that the copyright regime is maintained in a democratically sound fashion, or something even remotely resembling it? Anyone?

And what the hell are they even thinking doing things like this? Indeed, do the ministers have a secret agenda to completely destroy the little legitimacy copyrights still have in the minds of the people? 'cause that's what's been happening for a while now, and rampant copyright fascism does seem like the best way to speed up the process.

Oh, and artists, if you're smart, you'll disassociate yourselves as best you can from any media industry representative groups and their policies. Due to the stubborn unwillingness of big media to live in the 21st century and rather bring forth the Digital Dark Ages with their French Inquisitions, and due to the refusal of the politicians to actually serve the public interest instead of these money-grabbers, any controlled copyright reform towards sanity is getting less and less likely. So, unless we all lose and end up in a Big Brother society with the media companies watching our every move, we're headed towards a significant backlash to the wholesale destruction of civil liberties that's going on in the name of the poor starving artist. The more high-strung the fascist policies have gotten at that point, the more violent the backlash.

And here's what's bad for artists: the big business wants to associate you with them in this conflict. Some of you may think this is a good idea; if so, please feel free to dig your own grave. However, such a backlash is rather liable to take with it much of the public respect for artists who've been on the fascist side of the issue. More alarmingly, though, through these people the respect for artistry in general may suffer.

See, being Against Intellectual Monopoly, I'm all for a backlash that might even abolish copyrights altogether. They're a remnant of darker times, of control of culture by the few, of privilege to decree "no, you may not help your neighbor". We as a society don't need them, but rather are shackled by them in our shared cultural endeavors.

But I do hope the artists of the world to be savvy enough not to go down with that ship, to retain respect for your profession, because that respect, not copyrights, is what ultimately pays your bills.