What about adding a section (I'm new here thus hesitant) on the widespread criticicm concerning the always alarming tone of Lessig's arguments. Sources, e. g.: Mahoney, Julia D., Lawrence Lessig's Dystopian Vision. Virginia Law Review, Vol. 90, p. 2305, 2004 and the work of Christopher Yoo generally. The argument typically rejects the urgency of Lessig's bolder claims, for they are not scientific in the strict Popperian sense of being falsifiable. A threat that has scarcely emerged and is backed only by anecdotal evidence does not justify policy conclusions that may have a number of unintended consequences and evade a proper cost/benefit analysis.
I've decided to be bold and make some changes. First of all, I moved all the Free culture stuff to it's own page. Also, there were some comments that didn't really fit into the purpose of the page itself, those I've moved to the discussion page. Jacoplane 15:11, 4 February 2006 (PST)
You've given me a reason to stop procrastinating and start reading Free Culture... All take notes as I go along. I'll provide my viewpoint as a Photographer. (I use F/OSS exclusively for my workflow) If you find some free time, it would be great if you could join the DSLreports community. Karl and the other news editors cover your blog from time to time, as well as many issues you touch on in your blog. Anyway, I'm off to find the most suitable way to digest Free Culture. Decisions decisions.
Why is critique or divergent response considered anti-Lessig? Why is it not-possible to be interested in the ideas and in creative commons but be concerned about specific representations or projects which do not seem to be true to the stated purpose. If dialogue is boxed into for and against as per a legal courtroom then there is less opportunity to see us all as participants with common concerns looking for the best way to effect a creative commons and to explore ways to gain value from information as creators and participants in a dynamic social space. Positioning alternate ideas concerns and questions as the enemy is likely to leave the original idea where it stands and to reduce the capacity to gain value from community input. I expect most things I write will be put in the bad box, as anti. If that is how it is received then I can't do much about that. It is not how it is sent. Lucychili 11:52, 15 January 2007 (PST)