A modest, if controversial, proposal.

I've been thinking. Oh yes. Thinking about many things, and nothing at all. Things both simplistic and philosophical, worldy and spiritual, pointless and worthless and, in some cases, actually pretty damned brilliant. But enough of the nonsesne: I have no idea why I wrote all that bullshit and to be honest can't remember what it was I wrote. Terrible.

Anyway, as we all know, the internet is probably the one place where true anonymity may reign supreme if given the chance. The internet is the true home of freedom of just about everything, whether for good or for ill. And thus the internet is the home of piracy, for it is just so easy to get at stuff which isn't yours. And what's wrong with that, I say?

Now bear with me, I'm not gonna go start suggesting that piracy is always right. It's not. But surely a still greater evil is charging people for that which does not physically exist, hmm? No? Maybe? I'll let you think about that one. Regardless, an economy of sorts is needed for any great civilisation, and the internet needs an economy. To be quite frank, I see money as being irrelevant here. Someone once said that money is the root of all evil. I'm inclined to agree. The supply of digital data needs something better. Something more logical. Something that isn't a material possesion. I've heard suggestion of the trading of currency from video games, for instance. But that's daft. We don't all play MMOs, now, do we? How about the feudal system? A trade of equal value. Well, who's to state the value of something? What is The Anarchist`s Handbook worth in relation to, say, The Complete Works of Shakespeare? And indeed, how does Shakespeare compare to marlowe, or Bacon? What of the works of Freud? What value would we place on artwork? On stolen goods? On services? I say we keep it simple. I say there is a better way. Free sharing for all, but within limits.

What we desire most is simple: Knowledge. And thus should all knowledge be available to all, hmm? Problem is, wikipedia won't give you it. Neither will books. Random websites? Those that aren't biased are hard to find, and even then won't have the full story. For such a thing does not exist. But yet it is a neccesity. But a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. And that, my friends, is where meritocracy comes into play.

Knowledge should be available to all, yes, but it should not just be handed out! It should be given only to those who seek it, who actively request! Those who ask. to quote from the bible for a moment, "ask and it shall be given unto thee. Seek and thou shalt find. Knock and the door shall be opened." Might've been meant in a different context, but the words are right. those who can rule, will, and those who cannot, will not. And how is merit defined? Not only on ability but on knowledge! Knowledge that may be shared freely with others.

So how does this tie in with copyright theft? Simple. IT'S NOT BLOODY COPRIGHT THEFT IF YOU DON'T MAKE ANY CASH FROM IT! It's a tad immoral, maybe, but that's where ethics come in. I propose that the "fansub ethic" be taken to heart: that by downloading ontent, y'agree that if y'like it y'll buy the real thing where appropriate. Assuming said real thing is available in a physical form, of course. Like I say, charging people for access to anything online is a crime of the highest order. For it judges not on merit, but on ability and, more importantly, on means. Those without disposable income are screwed. And that just goes against the base principles of basic human rights.

And that's why I'll be making the Woodsman rulebook available as a free download on release, as well as selling it in both harback end ebook formats (I fully expect folk to distribute ilegally copies fo the ebook version, and will be dissapointed if you don't, by the way. Just ignore the legal blurb.) Admitably if you go for the free option you won't get any of the artwork or fiction we made up for the commercial release, but is that really such a bad thing?