Bliss n Eso feat: John Butler Trio - "The Sea is Rising" - Peace One Day Video
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Monday, September 19, 2011
IP Maps
Check out these IP Maps by Terry Fisher from Harvard:
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/tfisher/IP/IP%20Maps.htm
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/tfisher/IP/IP%20Maps.htm
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Song of the Moment: Work of Art
Global cooperation, empowerment, self-acceptance, celebration of diversity, tolerance, and love. Work of Art was written by a global team and is sung in 19 languages by Haikaa.
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind
I have been catching up on more reading this week - James Boyle's 'The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind' has been sitting in my reading tray for about 3 years and I was delighted to have an opportunity this week to take a look at it.
The central point of the book is that 'the line between intellectual property and the public domain is important in every aspect of culture, science and technology.' [pg xvi] Boyle begins by discussing the inherent aspects of intellectual property - that it is nonrival and nonexcludable and notes that financial reward is just one of the motivations behind creation - others are fame, altruism or because of another inherent creative force. [pg 3] Without limiting intellectual property rights, it becomes a system of corporate welfare. [pg 8] He writes:
'...the goal of the system ought to be to give the monopoly only for as long as necessary to provide incentive. After that, we should let the work fall into the public domain where all of us can use it, transform it, adapt it, build on it, republish it as we wish. For most works, the owners expect to make all the money the are going to recoup from the work with five or ten years of exclusive rights' [pg 11]
He discusses changes to copyright in recent years including automatic protection and term extension and notes that these have changed the contours of copyright regulation in a bad way. [pg 15].
Boyle terms the phrase 'The Jefferson Warning' to refer to the discussion of intellectual property at the time of its inception and the reluctance of the forefathers in granting monopoly rights. In essence intellectual property was not seen as a natural right rather a mechanism to create incentives, there is no entitlement as such to monopoly rights rather they are created by the State as a means to an end, they should not be permanent but rather only last as long as is needed to provide the incentive they set out to achieve, there are inherent dangers associated with intellectual property rights as they may cause more problems than they solve and the State must be careful to only award them when they are really needed. [pg 21-22] These sentiments were echoed by Thomas Babington Macaulay in his speech to the House of Commons in 1841:
'I may safely take it for granted that the effect of monopoly generally is to make articles scarce, to make them dear, and to make them bad.' [pg 22]
Reiterated by Boyle later in the text, he rephrases this to say that the concerns of the forefathers were that intellectual property creates artificial scarcity, high prices and low quality. [pg 37]
Boyle goes on to define the public domain and the commons:
'The public domain is material that is not covered by intellectual property rights. Material might be in the public domain because it was never capable of being owned. Examples would be the English language or the formulae of Newtonian physics. Alternatively, something might be in the public domain because rights have expired. The works of Shakespeare or the patents over powered flight are examples.
Some definitions of the public domain are more granular. They focus not only on complete works but on the reserved spaces of freedom inside intellectual property. The public domain would include the privilege to excerpt short quotations in a review. This vision is messier, but more instructive....' [pg 38]
'The term "commons" is generally used to denote a resource over which some group has access and use rights - albeit perhaps under certain conditions. It is used in even more ways that the term "public domain". The first axis along which definitions of the term "commons" vary is the size of the group that has access rights. Some would say it is a commons only if the whole society has access. That is the view I will take here.
The other difference between public domain and commons is the extent of restrictions on use. Material in the public domain is free of property rights. You may do with it what you wish. A commons can be restrictive. For example, some open source software makes your freedom to modify the software contingent on the conditions that your contributions, too, will be freely open to others.' [pg 39]
Boyle sees the public domain as important because it is the basis of art, science and self understanding. It is the raw material from which new things are made. [pg 39] He states that the more commodified and restricted our access to information, the less the market operates efficiently and more poorly it allocates resources in society. Creativity is undermined as the cost of the inputs rise. [pg 40]
Boyle then goes on to discuss the enclosure of land commons in England before referring to the increase in intellectual property rights as the second enclosure. [pg 43 -45] Here Hardin's tragedy of the commons does not apply as works are non rivalrous and nonexcludable. [pg 48] Indeed the increase in property rights creates a different problem:
'Using a nice inversion of the idea of the tragedy of the commons, Heller and Eisenberg referred to these effects - the transaction costs caused by myriad property rights over the necessary components of some subsequent innovation - as the tragedy of the anti commons'.
Boyle then goes on to term the phrase 'The Internet Threat' to refer to the digital environment and perceptions that technological changes empowering copying must mean an increase in property rights. [pg 53] In particular he refers to Napster and the changes that were brought about by file sharing. [pg 53] The logic of perfect control is discussed in detail in Chapter 4. [pg 61] The background to the Napster and Grokster litigation is also discussed. [see pg 71 - 79]
Chapter 6 discusses mashups in detail. In an earlier post here I embedded the YouTube clip to The Legendary KO's song 'George Bush Doesnt Care About Black People'. This is a fascinating chapter which traces the origins of that mashup and discusses the copyright implications for its reuse over time - this is a great example for anyone interested in the origins of mashups and the law around them. [pg 122] In discussing changes that need to be made to the law to allow for mashups Boyle states that one solution is to extend the system of compulsory licenses for cover versions to samples, or in the alternative, to exempt samples shorter than 5 seconds from copyright liability and clarify fair use. [pg 158-159]
Chapter 7 concerns the science commons with particular examples of software patents and synthetic biology. [pg 160]
Chapter 8 focuses on the creative commons and looks at flickr, ccmixter and creative commons [pg 179-181]. Boyle states that losses of sharing are every bit as real as losses from unauthorised copying. [pg 182] Further discussion on this topic looks to the free software movement and how creation of software takes place on a large scale despite a lower level of intellectual property rights. [pg 185]
In Boyle's eyes copyright maximalism was believed and pursued even when it did not make economic sense. [pg 198] It was a creation of a world view not a calculation of profit and loss:
'Not only did many of the rules we ended up with make no sense from the point of view of some of the largest economic players in the area - think of the device manufacturers, the search engines, and so on - they frequently made no sense from the perspective of those proposing them. Attempting to twist the law to make it illegal for technology to interfere with your business model is frequently bad for the industry seeking the protection, as well as for the technology, the markets, and the wider society.' [pg 199]
It was however a sincere belief that more rights would lead to more innovation. [pg 199]
Boyle is particularly critical of the lack of empirical evidence used to support changes in the law with a look at the legal protection for databases in the USA compared to Europe as one example. [pg 205 - 220]
Finally, Boyle proposes a movement along the lines of the environmental movement to lobby for changes to intellectual property law. [pg 230]
An excellent summary of the main points of the book is given on pages 205 & 236.
This is a brilliant book and very easy to read I really do recommend taking the time to look at it.
Further Reading
James Boyle, 'The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind' (2008) available for free at: < http://www.thepublicdomain.org/download/> at 13 September 2011
The central point of the book is that 'the line between intellectual property and the public domain is important in every aspect of culture, science and technology.' [pg xvi] Boyle begins by discussing the inherent aspects of intellectual property - that it is nonrival and nonexcludable and notes that financial reward is just one of the motivations behind creation - others are fame, altruism or because of another inherent creative force. [pg 3] Without limiting intellectual property rights, it becomes a system of corporate welfare. [pg 8] He writes:
'...the goal of the system ought to be to give the monopoly only for as long as necessary to provide incentive. After that, we should let the work fall into the public domain where all of us can use it, transform it, adapt it, build on it, republish it as we wish. For most works, the owners expect to make all the money the are going to recoup from the work with five or ten years of exclusive rights' [pg 11]
He discusses changes to copyright in recent years including automatic protection and term extension and notes that these have changed the contours of copyright regulation in a bad way. [pg 15].
Boyle terms the phrase 'The Jefferson Warning' to refer to the discussion of intellectual property at the time of its inception and the reluctance of the forefathers in granting monopoly rights. In essence intellectual property was not seen as a natural right rather a mechanism to create incentives, there is no entitlement as such to monopoly rights rather they are created by the State as a means to an end, they should not be permanent but rather only last as long as is needed to provide the incentive they set out to achieve, there are inherent dangers associated with intellectual property rights as they may cause more problems than they solve and the State must be careful to only award them when they are really needed. [pg 21-22] These sentiments were echoed by Thomas Babington Macaulay in his speech to the House of Commons in 1841:
'I may safely take it for granted that the effect of monopoly generally is to make articles scarce, to make them dear, and to make them bad.' [pg 22]
Reiterated by Boyle later in the text, he rephrases this to say that the concerns of the forefathers were that intellectual property creates artificial scarcity, high prices and low quality. [pg 37]
Boyle goes on to define the public domain and the commons:
'The public domain is material that is not covered by intellectual property rights. Material might be in the public domain because it was never capable of being owned. Examples would be the English language or the formulae of Newtonian physics. Alternatively, something might be in the public domain because rights have expired. The works of Shakespeare or the patents over powered flight are examples.
Some definitions of the public domain are more granular. They focus not only on complete works but on the reserved spaces of freedom inside intellectual property. The public domain would include the privilege to excerpt short quotations in a review. This vision is messier, but more instructive....' [pg 38]
'The term "commons" is generally used to denote a resource over which some group has access and use rights - albeit perhaps under certain conditions. It is used in even more ways that the term "public domain". The first axis along which definitions of the term "commons" vary is the size of the group that has access rights. Some would say it is a commons only if the whole society has access. That is the view I will take here.
The other difference between public domain and commons is the extent of restrictions on use. Material in the public domain is free of property rights. You may do with it what you wish. A commons can be restrictive. For example, some open source software makes your freedom to modify the software contingent on the conditions that your contributions, too, will be freely open to others.' [pg 39]
Boyle sees the public domain as important because it is the basis of art, science and self understanding. It is the raw material from which new things are made. [pg 39] He states that the more commodified and restricted our access to information, the less the market operates efficiently and more poorly it allocates resources in society. Creativity is undermined as the cost of the inputs rise. [pg 40]
Boyle then goes on to discuss the enclosure of land commons in England before referring to the increase in intellectual property rights as the second enclosure. [pg 43 -45] Here Hardin's tragedy of the commons does not apply as works are non rivalrous and nonexcludable. [pg 48] Indeed the increase in property rights creates a different problem:
'Using a nice inversion of the idea of the tragedy of the commons, Heller and Eisenberg referred to these effects - the transaction costs caused by myriad property rights over the necessary components of some subsequent innovation - as the tragedy of the anti commons'.
Boyle then goes on to term the phrase 'The Internet Threat' to refer to the digital environment and perceptions that technological changes empowering copying must mean an increase in property rights. [pg 53] In particular he refers to Napster and the changes that were brought about by file sharing. [pg 53] The logic of perfect control is discussed in detail in Chapter 4. [pg 61] The background to the Napster and Grokster litigation is also discussed. [see pg 71 - 79]
Chapter 6 discusses mashups in detail. In an earlier post here I embedded the YouTube clip to The Legendary KO's song 'George Bush Doesnt Care About Black People'. This is a fascinating chapter which traces the origins of that mashup and discusses the copyright implications for its reuse over time - this is a great example for anyone interested in the origins of mashups and the law around them. [pg 122] In discussing changes that need to be made to the law to allow for mashups Boyle states that one solution is to extend the system of compulsory licenses for cover versions to samples, or in the alternative, to exempt samples shorter than 5 seconds from copyright liability and clarify fair use. [pg 158-159]
Chapter 7 concerns the science commons with particular examples of software patents and synthetic biology. [pg 160]
Chapter 8 focuses on the creative commons and looks at flickr, ccmixter and creative commons [pg 179-181]. Boyle states that losses of sharing are every bit as real as losses from unauthorised copying. [pg 182] Further discussion on this topic looks to the free software movement and how creation of software takes place on a large scale despite a lower level of intellectual property rights. [pg 185]
In Boyle's eyes copyright maximalism was believed and pursued even when it did not make economic sense. [pg 198] It was a creation of a world view not a calculation of profit and loss:
'Not only did many of the rules we ended up with make no sense from the point of view of some of the largest economic players in the area - think of the device manufacturers, the search engines, and so on - they frequently made no sense from the perspective of those proposing them. Attempting to twist the law to make it illegal for technology to interfere with your business model is frequently bad for the industry seeking the protection, as well as for the technology, the markets, and the wider society.' [pg 199]
It was however a sincere belief that more rights would lead to more innovation. [pg 199]
Boyle is particularly critical of the lack of empirical evidence used to support changes in the law with a look at the legal protection for databases in the USA compared to Europe as one example. [pg 205 - 220]
Finally, Boyle proposes a movement along the lines of the environmental movement to lobby for changes to intellectual property law. [pg 230]
An excellent summary of the main points of the book is given on pages 205 & 236.
This is a brilliant book and very easy to read I really do recommend taking the time to look at it.
Further Reading
James Boyle, 'The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind' (2008) available for free at: < http://www.thepublicdomain.org/download/> at 13 September 2011
Monday, September 12, 2011
Wicked Website: Great Protest Songs
Just came across a great website, which I think is fairly new, called Great Protest Songs. Written by a father and son team, the site covers protest songs, peace songs, freedom songs, anti war songs and political songs with links to YouTube clips and a blog. They also have a facebook page. Check it out here - its great!
Further Information
Great Protest Songs < http://www.greatprotestsongs.com/ > at 12 September 2011
Further Information
Great Protest Songs < http://www.greatprotestsongs.com/ > at 12 September 2011
FMC Artist Revenue Streams Survey Launch
The Future of Music Coalition are conducting a survey on revenue streams for USA musicians - take the time to participate if this applies to you.
They write:
They write:
FMC urges US-based musicians and composers who are 18 years of age or older to participate in this online survey. Your participation is both voluntary and anonymous. There are no questions that identify you as an individual, and your data will be aggregated with thousands of other musicians.
By participating in this survey, you are contributing to something much bigger than simply providing us with some information about your life and musical work; the results will provide a rich snapshot of the complex nature of being a musician in the 21st century.
We will be sharing the data with organizations, advocates and musicians nationwide in 2012, and it will help us to ensure that policymakers and consumers understand the financial realities of musicians today.
You can take the survey by visiting FMC here.Saturday, September 10, 2011
Copyright Criminals
I havent yet been able to see the movie Copyright Criminals but have come across four short extracts of the film on the PBS classroom materials website. Check them out here.
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
George Bush Doesnt Like Black People
Reading the book by James Boyle 'The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind' - more about that in a post soon (havent finished it yet) but for now take a look at this clip:
Boyle writes a chapter on mashups and focuses on this song and the rights associated with the original(s). I'll tell you more about it soon, for now just know this is a great political mashup.
Boyle writes a chapter on mashups and focuses on this song and the rights associated with the original(s). I'll tell you more about it soon, for now just know this is a great political mashup.
Thursday, September 1, 2011
The Pirate's Dilemma
I finally got around to reading the book 'The Pirate's Dilemma: How Youth Culture is Reinventing Capitalism' this week - you can find the book here. It is available for free as well as on Amazon and is well worth the read even if it has dated a little now.
An interesting link is made between piracy and Punk Capitalism:
'D.I.Y encourages us to reject authority and hierarchy, advocating that we can and should produce as much as we consume. Since punk, this idea has been quietly changing the very fabric of our economic system, replacing outdated ideas with the twenty-first-century upgrades of Punk Capitalism' [pg 12]
The Do It Yourself mentality has become a way of life for many in the digital age:
'Our world today is starting to look a lot more like a punk gig (okay, maybe with slightly less spitting). The barriers to entry are being kicked down, and this new breed of fans-turned-performers, including you, is rushing the world stage. Technology is cheap; information is everywhere; and the roadies are gone (who takes advice from roadies anyway?). The only thing left to do is to stop defining ourselves by the old hierarchy and run up on stage.' [pg 18]
Indeed there is no longer such a thing as 'owning the means of production':
'It seems that ownership of the means of production - the backbone of capitalism - is falling into the hands of the masses. But soon the notion of "owning" the means of production may itself be redundant.' [pg 28]
Piracy is seen largely as a good thing:
'Pirates create positive social and economic changes, and understanding piracy today is more important than ever, because now that we all can copy and broadcast whatever we want; we can all become pirates' [pg 35] '...Piracy transforms the markets it operates in, changing the way distribution works and forcing companies to be more competitive and innovative. Pirates don't just defend the public domain from corporate control; they also force big business and government to deliver what we want, when we want it. [pg 38]
File sharing is just one example of piracy in the digital age:
'The Internet community that believes file-sharing networks are vitally important to culture and innovation have never stopped opening new p2p networks as fast as the authorities try to close them down. A good idea is powerful only if people are willing to get behind it. By giving a community a new space that was not previously available to them, you can empower them, and they in turn will propel your idea forward.
In the case of piracy we have looked at so far, there are two ways in which they win. Either the laws prohibiting them change, or the pirates become so popular the laws are effectively ignored. But the pirate mentality has now been taken on by many who weren't breaking the law in the first place.' [pg 48]
There is an excellent discussion of remix culture and the history of hip hop among other issues such as patents, medicine, youth culture, graffiti culture, pirate radio, the open source software movement, Wikipedia, the history of dance parties, and the future of 3D printing.
In relation to music in particular, Mason states:
'Music, one of our most previous forms of information, has always wanted to be free, spreading across the globe and mutating into new forms' [pg 146]
Napster and the history and motivation behind file sharing is discussed in detail from pages 154 to 161. Reference is made to the exploitation of musicians by record labels, with particular reference to a study conducted by the Pew Internet & American Life Project:
'A study by the Pew Internet & American Life Project asked three thousand musicians and songwriters their views on file-sharing in April 2004. A total of 35 percent of those polled said that file sharing was not necessarily bad, because it helped market and distribute their work; 35 percent said file sharing had actually boosted their reputations. Only 23 percent of those asked agreed that file sharing was harmful; 83 percent said they had deliberately put free samples of their music online.' [pg 156]
The slow and painful death of the record industry was caused in part by their response to file sharing with Mason concluding:
'The death of the record industry was the best thing that could have happened to the business of making music.' [pg 158]
Blanket licensing is discussed with reference to Peter Jenner, the former manager of the Clash and Pink Floyd. [pg 160]
The changes in the music industry have been monumental over the past decade:
'The music industry is being replaced by a new middle class, but this isn't just a class of musicians, it's also a new democracy that offers businesses and citizens more opportunities, which is redefining our economic system.' [pg 166]
The Pirate's Dilemma is, ultimately, whether to compete with piracy or to try to stop it:
'The new democracy in the music industry gave us more choice, but for the old industry machine it means less dominance for marketing-led manufactured music and more opportunity for organically grown niche acts. We find ourselves with a unique opportunity to share anything that can be transmitted electronically the same way we share music, and all industries could face the same changes. The future depends on whether we fight these changes, or see them for the opportunities they are.' [pg 170]
Mason discusses game theory based on what is known as 'The Prisoner's Dilemma' and sketches out the consequences for society and businesses if they elect to compete or to quash piracy. Society gains maximum value when businesses compete with piracy. [pg 239] He states:
'Piracy isn't just another business model, it's one of the greatest business models we have.
Acting like a pirate-taking value from the market, or creating new spaces outside the market and giving it back to the community, whether it's with free open-source software or selling cheap Starbury sneakers-is a great way to serve public interests and a great way to make an authentic connection to a new audience.' [pg 240]
This is a great book, albeit a little short on referencing, but worth taking a look at. It is well written and easy to read and covers a whole range of subjects that are very interesting.
Further Reading
Matt Mason, 'The Pirate's Dilemma: How Youth Culture is Reinventing Capitalism' (2008) < http://thepiratesdilemma.com/download-the-book > at 1 September 2011
An interesting link is made between piracy and Punk Capitalism:
'D.I.Y encourages us to reject authority and hierarchy, advocating that we can and should produce as much as we consume. Since punk, this idea has been quietly changing the very fabric of our economic system, replacing outdated ideas with the twenty-first-century upgrades of Punk Capitalism' [pg 12]
The Do It Yourself mentality has become a way of life for many in the digital age:
'Our world today is starting to look a lot more like a punk gig (okay, maybe with slightly less spitting). The barriers to entry are being kicked down, and this new breed of fans-turned-performers, including you, is rushing the world stage. Technology is cheap; information is everywhere; and the roadies are gone (who takes advice from roadies anyway?). The only thing left to do is to stop defining ourselves by the old hierarchy and run up on stage.' [pg 18]
Indeed there is no longer such a thing as 'owning the means of production':
'It seems that ownership of the means of production - the backbone of capitalism - is falling into the hands of the masses. But soon the notion of "owning" the means of production may itself be redundant.' [pg 28]
Piracy is seen largely as a good thing:
'Pirates create positive social and economic changes, and understanding piracy today is more important than ever, because now that we all can copy and broadcast whatever we want; we can all become pirates' [pg 35] '...Piracy transforms the markets it operates in, changing the way distribution works and forcing companies to be more competitive and innovative. Pirates don't just defend the public domain from corporate control; they also force big business and government to deliver what we want, when we want it. [pg 38]
File sharing is just one example of piracy in the digital age:
'The Internet community that believes file-sharing networks are vitally important to culture and innovation have never stopped opening new p2p networks as fast as the authorities try to close them down. A good idea is powerful only if people are willing to get behind it. By giving a community a new space that was not previously available to them, you can empower them, and they in turn will propel your idea forward.
In the case of piracy we have looked at so far, there are two ways in which they win. Either the laws prohibiting them change, or the pirates become so popular the laws are effectively ignored. But the pirate mentality has now been taken on by many who weren't breaking the law in the first place.' [pg 48]
There is an excellent discussion of remix culture and the history of hip hop among other issues such as patents, medicine, youth culture, graffiti culture, pirate radio, the open source software movement, Wikipedia, the history of dance parties, and the future of 3D printing.
In relation to music in particular, Mason states:
'Music, one of our most previous forms of information, has always wanted to be free, spreading across the globe and mutating into new forms' [pg 146]
Napster and the history and motivation behind file sharing is discussed in detail from pages 154 to 161. Reference is made to the exploitation of musicians by record labels, with particular reference to a study conducted by the Pew Internet & American Life Project:
'A study by the Pew Internet & American Life Project asked three thousand musicians and songwriters their views on file-sharing in April 2004. A total of 35 percent of those polled said that file sharing was not necessarily bad, because it helped market and distribute their work; 35 percent said file sharing had actually boosted their reputations. Only 23 percent of those asked agreed that file sharing was harmful; 83 percent said they had deliberately put free samples of their music online.' [pg 156]
The slow and painful death of the record industry was caused in part by their response to file sharing with Mason concluding:
'The death of the record industry was the best thing that could have happened to the business of making music.' [pg 158]
Blanket licensing is discussed with reference to Peter Jenner, the former manager of the Clash and Pink Floyd. [pg 160]
The changes in the music industry have been monumental over the past decade:
'The music industry is being replaced by a new middle class, but this isn't just a class of musicians, it's also a new democracy that offers businesses and citizens more opportunities, which is redefining our economic system.' [pg 166]
The Pirate's Dilemma is, ultimately, whether to compete with piracy or to try to stop it:
'The new democracy in the music industry gave us more choice, but for the old industry machine it means less dominance for marketing-led manufactured music and more opportunity for organically grown niche acts. We find ourselves with a unique opportunity to share anything that can be transmitted electronically the same way we share music, and all industries could face the same changes. The future depends on whether we fight these changes, or see them for the opportunities they are.' [pg 170]
Mason discusses game theory based on what is known as 'The Prisoner's Dilemma' and sketches out the consequences for society and businesses if they elect to compete or to quash piracy. Society gains maximum value when businesses compete with piracy. [pg 239] He states:
'Piracy isn't just another business model, it's one of the greatest business models we have.
Acting like a pirate-taking value from the market, or creating new spaces outside the market and giving it back to the community, whether it's with free open-source software or selling cheap Starbury sneakers-is a great way to serve public interests and a great way to make an authentic connection to a new audience.' [pg 240]
This is a great book, albeit a little short on referencing, but worth taking a look at. It is well written and easy to read and covers a whole range of subjects that are very interesting.
Further Reading
Matt Mason, 'The Pirate's Dilemma: How Youth Culture is Reinventing Capitalism' (2008) < http://thepiratesdilemma.com/download-the-book > at 1 September 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
