A2K, Practice, Nonknowledge

You may also like...

3 Responses

  1. ooooo says:

    Mr. Boon,

    I enjoy your writing on this topic. I have had lingering feelings of fear and disgust as I watch the debates about intellectual property unfold. But it has taken a while for me to understand why I feel the way I do.

    I like your thoughts on community and identity, and even “being.” As certain institutions, organizations, and individuals discuss and act, I feel threatened by some of the underlying narratives and myths? they seem committed to.

    I have been thinking of how to bring this somewhat nebulous feeling into the broader conversation. It’s not easy, but your approach feels right. It is comforting to know that there are others who feel the way I do. Thank you for your work.


  2. Amy Kapczynski says:

    I love the idea of “nonknowledge” – how important it might be for us to have spaces also of not-knowing… Lawrence Liang has two pieces in the book that resonate quite beautifully with what you write here. One invites us to think of our relationships to “works” like books as just that, relationships (the essay is called “the man who mistook his wife for a book”). The other is a challenge to the disavowal of practices of media piracy within some A2K circles, precisely trying to pay attention to pirate practices, and also pleasures.

  3. Frank Pasquale says:

    Excellent points. I agree that there can be intrinsic value in simply engaging with a work, regardless of its potential to edify, contribute to democratic discourse, etc.

    By the way, there is a keen appreciation of “tacit knowledge” and implicit knowledge in the IP work of people like Dan Burk and Margaret Chon. Their work highlights the importance of knowledge ecosystems and human relationships that are obscured in the current vogue for “algorithmizing” knowledge. Stephen Marglin has counted four “dimensions” of systems of knowledge–epistemology, transmission, innovation, and power (The Dismal Science, 129). He is very critical of the urge to reduce everything to replicable steps, as contemporary economics often aspires to do. Emphasis on replicable and transmittable “progress in the arts and sciences” can occlude important sources of value and social stability.