Category Archives: Uncategorized

Here’s another alternative to the Induce Act, and there are others out there…. Continue reading →

I wasn’t convinced that the broadcast flag was such a big deal. But this story about Tivo asking the FCC for permission to add new features is changing my mind. Creative destruction doesn’t ask for permission. (Thanks to Jonathan Zittrain, Susan Crawford)…. Continue reading →

Advertising every day becomes more like cave art. Here’s aBetterEarth’s new environmental ad contest…. Continue reading →

Friday at Slate. Continue reading →

Here’s who you should call to express your views about the INDUCE Act. Continue reading →

Robert Reddick produced this cool ad which very effectively makes a point that I’ve been blathering on about with less effect. Continue reading →

Rick Prelinger, father of public domain film, will show Panorama Ephemera, a feature-length collage film, at the San Francisco Cinematheque on Sunday, June 13 at 7:30 pm.

The film is made from “ephemeral film,” which either were not copyrighted when originally published, or have passed into the public domain. The supply of such film officially ended in 1978, when all film is automatically (federally) copyrighted. (CORRECTED!) Continue reading →

Joe Buck commented on one of my earlier posts that when we (or I) use phrases like “creative communities” we tend to slight coders. “Besides the fact that a lot of geeks resent it, it builds unnecessary walls. Many on Jack Valenti�s side of the divide treasure their creative freedom and fight like dogs against any who would block it,” Buck writes.

I could not agree more. I guess I assume too easily that when we discuss copyright, Free Culture, and creativity, we are discussing the vast array of human creative activities. And I assume (perhaps incorrectly) that my audiences see creativity flowing over arbitrary barriers as I do. After all, “convergence” is not just a marketing or engineering concept. It is the essense of stunning creativity, whether embodied in a Picasso sculpture, a Mozart opera, or a phat video game.

So I guess we need to make this point more overtly. After all, as Buck points out, each sub-audience of creators (musicians, composers, screenwriters, directors, hackers, coders, photographers) tend to see these issues in their local contexts — “how does Kelly v. Arriba affect me?”

When I speak publicly, I try to get musicians, for instance, to see that Alice Randall’s experience with getting The Wind Done Gone published is something they might have to experience themselves. And that as cultural citizens, they should be concerned about her experience anyway.

BTW, in The Anarchist in the Library, I make the case that the appeals court had to cheat to get The Wind Done Gone published. It is not a parody of Gone with the Wind. It is a transformative work that should have been allowed on those grounds. But the court was not willing to move beyond the narrowest reading of Campbell v. Acuff Rose. So we are stuck trying to force non-parodies into parodic costumes just to avoid prior restraint. Continue reading →

Ed Black of the Open Source and Industry Alliance has written Ms. Lois Boland a very nice and good letter about the recent statements about “open source.”

Meanwhile, there’s much reporting that Microsoft is behind the lobbying to kill the WIPO meeting. I don’t know anything about that (for some reason, I’ve been removed from Mr. Gates’ lobbying-strategy list). But it is useful to contrast the sophisticated, moderate, and well-informed work of Microsoft’s GC, Brad Smith, about “open source” software, recently published in a Joint AEI/Brookings book.

In addition to Ed Black’s letter, and perhaps letters from you, she might find Brad Smith’s essay useful. Continue reading →