Letters - 11 April 2014
From copyright concerns to spiritual words
Copyright concerns
Hayley Gullen’s objection to one of her cartoons being used without permission on a Quaker Facebook page was headed ‘Copyright concerns’ (14 March). A visual artist’s work stands complete within itself. It cannot be cited in part as ‘fair use’. I, therefore, have a considerable measure of sympathy with her position, namely: ‘The creator, therefore, maintains the important right to have control over where, and how, it is distributed. Not recognising this right has serious implications – for example, potentially reducing the income of hard-working artists.’
However, I would be dismayed if Friends started to feel constrained from quoting literary work out of a sense that they ought to first procure permission from authors and publishers. Already, commercial interests are trying to narrow down time-honoured definitions of ‘fair use’. This colonises emotional and intellectual territory. It blocks the flow of motifs that only gained their currency in the first place by having traction with the common treasury of the cultural psyche.
I am told that Islam holds knowledge and creativity to be the gift of Allah. Some scholars, therefore, deem modern notions of ‘intellectual property’ to be a form of theft. Jesus similarly challenged those who hold the keys of learning yet hinder others at the gate (Luke 11:52). Where do Friends stand today? Do we still believe that work is worship? Are the fruits of our creativity really ‘ours’, any more than ministry under the promptings of the Holy Spirit can be said to be ‘ours’? Consider aquifers when drawing from the well.
Alastair McIntosh
Transforming ourselves…
Laurie Michaelis writes in his report (21 March) on the Canterbury Commitment Conference at Swanwick that a ‘vocal group’ raised the subject of population growth.
To clarify, three of us from Nailsworth Meeting – Cherry Foster, Chris Green and I – are acting under Concern. We have been asked by Gloucester Area Meeting (AM) to raise the issue of population at a Special Interest Group at Yearly Meeting Gathering at Bath this year. We have support from Friends from a number of AMs in this, some of whom were present, and there is increasing interest in other AMs. Since this Concern chimes precisely with the aims of the Canterbury Commitment, we thought it right to bring it to Swanwick.
Were we vocal? We weren’t exceptional: it was about the most vocal meeting, in the best way, that I have attended. We were there to make an important point, and we made it. We didn’t try to dominate any discussion. We simply raised the subject when it seemed appropriate.
The pamphlet that Laurie refers to is not typical of our thinking. He doesn’t mention – perhaps he didn’t see – any of the other literature that we had to offer. We are all individuals, of course, but, generally, our views are pretty close to those of the charity Population Matters (www.populationmatters.com), which rejects coercion in any form.
I hope everyone interested will come to the Special Interest Group, which we expect will be at lunchtime on Tuesday, 5 August, in Bath. Roger Martin, the chair of Population Matters, will be addressing us.
Roger Plenty
You need to login to read subscriber-only content and/or comment on articles.