This site is devoted to copyright and issues of 'intellectual property,' particularly the issue's analytical aspects. It also concerns itself with the gap between public perception and the true facts, and with the significant lag time between the coverage on more technical sites and the mainstream press. For site feed, see: To see the list of sites monitored to create this site, see:

Sunday, June 26, 2005

Copyright as culture. More.

Nice summary of Second Life. More Second Life news.

Smart. Really smart. Extension of an SNIU.

Grokster reader's guide.

Shady RIAA accounting. I wrote about it here, and George Ziemann had done much more even before I started working on mine (rant warning).
More funny accounting from another four-letter-clad organization.

Must-see TV (ads).

Tie-ins with norms battle news item of the day.

Grokster coverage
Hollywood Reporter article on Grokster. Surprisingly balanced.
From the new Picker MobBlog.
Miller's take on the coverage.

Libertarian dissociates property from IP. Perhaps the greatest framing victory ever was labeling IP property. I've tried avoiding using the term, and it just fails. The InfoAnarchy group, when it was just getting started, had a whole long conversation about what to call it instead, and came up with no satisfactory alternatives. The term is here to stay. But the concept is simply destructive, because IP has the potential to violate the most fundamental rule of property--two people can't own the same item--with spectacular results, but only if it is allowed to behave like something distinct from property. So when someone can come up with a good term for IP besides IP, I'll be the first to switch over.
My other little pet terminology war is with "content creator" versus "content controller" (here I'm generally successful in avoiding "content owner," because controller still seems plenty clear to me). This came up in the Peters testimony frequently, and she regrettably conflated the two concepts several times.

Broadcast flag.

50% PVR adoption by 2009.
Miller does the sentimentalist in me proud:
"I disagree. It's not about the number of hits you get, it's about the knowledge produced. My contribution may be small, my readership not even a blip compared to Instapundit, but I believe my contribution worthwhile. And, for the reasons I've shown above, I encourage others who think they can move the knowledge ball down the field, if only a little, to give it a try. For all this talk of power law distributions and A-lists, the creation of knowledge is not pre-determined. Newton may have stood on the shoulders of giants, but he also stood on the shoulders of guys who weren't so giant, who filled in the gaps, who made a small contribution. They may be forgotten now, but they contributed. If I can contribute, I'll be happy."

They get it? We'll see, but it does seem like this might be a great example of new media in action.

Most of the above comes via Ernest Miller's scarily prolific blog.

Nice tale of how remix culture can rapidly turn to political speech.

PLoS Biology finally has an impact factor, and it's pretty darn good.

Daily dose of Patry.



Post a Comment

<< Home