To simplify I think n99 and art in general should focus not on controlling content or on what OTHER people do but on giving artists to control what THEY can do. This in essence is what I think the philosophy should boil down to: Not attempting to control what others do or even what they do with any type of content but rather controlling one’s own actions and having creative and financial flexibility. Control and change yourself not others.
This is even more important for n99 since n99 is ALSO a communications forum. We are not just discussing copyright here but also censorship, which ALSO conflicts with privacy, security and freedom and censorship is ALSO based on an authoritative model. This is why I have gone on to such length about this because an authority model SIMPLY DOES NOT WORK on SAFE and is fairly futile on the net in general. Moreover it is in a large part something many of us are building a decentralized internet to get away from. So it seems ironic that a few of the first apps we build then immediately talk about incorporating it into their make up. This is precisely why I accused n99 of being a sell out. Because if it is in favor of content moderation or even attempts to defend copyright then it is simply immitating the authority driven model of governments and corporations. If x or y group wants a private moderated chat channel so they can have holier than thou Christian rock or inflate your ego political condom commercials I really don’t care but the whole NETWORK shouldn’t need a terms of service and have to agree not to post x or y content. Ultimately because attempting to monitor them would be impossible and because if you can monitor one kind of content you can monitor another kind. This means n99 could be sued at some point or allowing “hate speech” or “fake news” or any number of other things on their site. But if they rig it where they can’t and DON’T moderate anyone and where users manage their own filters and content they’re less liable.