Free culture against arbitrary censorship

I was browsing today, reading on the debate on whether or not censorship only occurs when it is performed by the government or some violent non-state actor. 

Then I happened upon this appeal issued by the EFF, calling for an end to censorship. It particularly hit home with the following:

Unfortunately, these values are only as strong as the will to support them. When individuals or companies choose to turn their backs on protected speech, we all lose.

 

Mike Linksvayer further expanded upon this idea, in the vein of copyright reform, by advocating free culture licenses as an altruistic rejection of one’s own privilege of censorship:

Not only does EFF fight censorship, they also retain almost no right to censor works they produce. They use a Creative Commons Attribution license, which only requires giving credit to make any use (well, any use that doesn’t imply endorsement). You should also join them is saying no to censorship in this way — no to your own ability to be a censor.

Finally, Freenet operates upon a principle of plausible deniability, whereby users of nodes are immediately saddled with a random, anonymous cache of block data on their corresponding hard drive disks, the result of which is that both everyone and no-one takes ownership of the hosting of prohibited content. This allows for Freenet to operate on an increasingly-absolute idea of "freedom of speech" – that no one within or outside can take down one iota of content or take exclusive ownership of said content from the ether of Freenet. 

 
So should there be a more tight-knit infrastructure for the non-coercive reduction of arbitrary censorship, and do the likes of Creative Commons, Freenet, the Freedom Box project headed by Eben Moglen, the much-discussed open alternative DNS system, and others contribute to such a realization?

Leave a comment