Sloganeering.Org
home | archive | about | site policies | contact us | s.o store

Archive for April, 2009

100 Penny Review: The Public Domain

Friday, April 24th, 2009

The Public Domain Book Cover

The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind
by James Boyle
Yale University Press, 2008
336 Pages
ISBN 0300137400
Original price: Free (ebook)
What I paid: Free (ebook)
Acquired from:
ThePublicDomain.org
Condition: N/A

For a long time the legal boundaries that protected intellectual property were invisible to the ordinary masses of mankind. This was chiefly due to the fact that it was very difficult to copy intellectual property without a massive investment in equipment and technical know-how. But when the general-purpose computer gained widespread adoption by the masses, and when it became possible to network these computers together, all over the world, copying became very, very easy indeed. People who either didn’t know the rules of intellectual property – or who didn’t care about them – began freely trading copyrighted materials, which led to the content owners freaking out, further leading them to push for ever more draconian intellectual property protections in law.

This sets the scene for James Boyle’s book, The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind. From there, using analogies, case studies, copious examples and excerpts from legal opinions and court decisions, Boyle makes a case for action against the digital rights “land grab” being pursued by content owners. It’s an important book, no question. In fact, it rather reminds me of another important book from way back when.

In the days before Nicholas Negroponte turned into the Bob Geldof of technology, he wrote a little book about a big idea. It was called Being Digital. The impact of Negroponte’s little book would be difficult to describe to someone who didn’t read it back in the mid-to-late nineties, and some of its premises might seem a little hoary these days – but it was an immensely important book at the time. Back then, when computers were for geeks, and few people imagined that shopping, watching videos, or making friends via keyboard would ever come to pass, Being Digital was a statement of belief, a manifesto that could be handed off to people who didn’t understand what we were talking about. In those days, geeks were evangelists, and Being Digital was our liturgical literature.

The value of books like Being Digital and The Public Domain is that they help teach us how to think about their concepts in ways that we might not be used to. In Negroponte’s case, he taught a generation of budding technologists how to decouple information from the mediums that carried it; Boyle, on the other hand, shows us how to look at intellectual property rights without succumbing to the logical traps that might otherwise lead us into supporting ever-expanding restrictions on how consumers can and should use the products of the content-owners.

The problem with these sorts of books, and with The Public Domain specifically, is that the certain factors lead to undesirable effects. Many of the people who would be most interested in a polemic against expanded intellectual property are already on board with the ideas being espoused in the book. They might, therefore, find it boring or obvious; or they might enjoy having their beliefs reinforced by reading a clear and persuasive restatement of all the things they already think. It’s also possible that the book will be read by strong IP restriction advocates looking to debunk it, and not many of those readers will be turned by any argument, no matter how persuasive. More importantly, however, is the fact that the lay reader may not care enough about the issues either way to give the book a shot.

They really should, though. It’s entertaining enough and non-technical enough to serve as a primer for intellectual property issue novices. The examples and analogies are down to earth, easy to understand, and may engender a certain amount of suspicion in a skeptical reader that the topics have been simplified too much to be useful. It should go without saying (but that won’t stop me) that sympathetic readers will appreciate the grounding that Boyle’s analogies provide.

I found certain portions of the book to be a little repetitive. While one certainly wants the book to tie together into a sensible whole, Boyle’s gift for reiteration gets a little out of hand. He’ll make a point. Then he’ll have an example. Then he’ll restate the original point without actually needing to, at least to my mind. But then, the issues are complex, and perhaps they do need to be driven home repeatedly. My own dislike for this method may have a lot to do with the fact that I have been reading about intellectual property issues since 1996 and, frankly, I’m kind of sick to death here.

Still, even if you’re the sort of person who doesn’t want to delve too deeply into the concepts and arguments of intellectual property, it still might be a good idea to read this book, because these issues ultimately effect the entertainment media landscape that we all have to inhabit. Seeing how those results percolate down from the high-minded concepts and legal wrangling explained in the book might be enough to anger you into action – or at least interest. At the very least, by the end of the book, you’ll definitely understand why the public domain is monumentally important to a healthy and vibrant culture, even if you don’t actively engage in the movement Boyle describes at the end of the book.

And hey, the e-edition is free, so you’ve got nothing to lose but your time.




xkcd Book In the Works

Monday, April 20th, 2009

You can probably glean all the information you require from the NY Times headline, but if you’re interested in the particulars, you might want to read the article anyway. Quote:

The book – with the working title “xkcd,” though Mr. Ohanian says it may carry a subtitle like “a book of romance, sarcasm, math and language” – will not initially be sold in bookstores, and probably never in the big chains. Instead, it will be sold through the xkcd Web site.

“It doesn’t need to be in bookstores,” Mr. Munroe said. “I don’t have hard numbers about this, but the impression I get is that the amount of eyeballs you get from being on the humor shelf at Barnes & Noble – it is almost insignificant.”

The fact of the book’s web-only availability doesn’t necessarily bother me. Though, given the overall horribleness of the titles on the Barnes & Noble (and Borders) humor shelf, I’m disappointed that this book won’t be there to drive that quality level upward.

Generalizing from this specific incident, I would like to ask one question: Why is it that whenever web-based writers or artists end up producing physical products it always winds up being an opportunity for the old media to freak the fuck out?

| April 20th, 2009 | by BCSilvia | Categories: Humor | Tags: , | Trackback | 1 Comment »



RIP: J.G. Ballard

Sunday, April 19th, 2009

As noted all over the Internet this morning: J.G. Ballard has died.

This is a sad day for science fiction fans the world over. As a writer, Ballard produced some of the most unique, harrowing fiction of his day, and he will be sorely missed.

My introduction to his work came about, oddly enough, through a Doctor Who story which was based heavily on a the Ballard novel, High-Rise. (I recommend it, if you haven’t read it already.) From there I was guided to one of his short story collections, called Atrocity Exhibition, probably his most famous work besides Crash.

You remember the movie version of Crash, surely. The film that explored the erotic dimensions of automobile crashes, with scars by Georgia O’Keefe? The book also inspired a song called “Warm Leatherette”, which was eventually covered by Grace Jones as the title track of her second album.

Also: Ballard wrote a short piece entitled “Why I Want to Fuck Ronald Reagan,” (full text here) again using the imagery of auto-wrecks in his work.

| April 19th, 2009 | by BCSilvia | Categories: Books & Literature, Death | Tags: | Trackback | No Comments »



Tubular

Saturday, April 18th, 2009

Another lazy Saturday afternoon spent watching YouTube. I know that since its demise as the worlds premier copyright infringement showcase (and the attendant corporate-sponsored dreck that’s sprung up as a result of this), YouTube has become very uncool to talk about, but I’m perpetually behind the times on these sorts of things. Anyway, some random observations:

- In a world where even the cheapest professionally produced TV show can afford a little CGI here and there, YouTube is one of the few places that we can all reconnect with a style of video production where things like chyrons are a huge technical achievement. Many videos are made with single camera setups and minimal post-production. What this means is that, even if we are now a society so well versed in the language of visual representation that we innately understand its rules, YouTube artists often have no choice but to break those conventions due these technical limitations. And, when you’ve watched as much television as I have, there can be a pleasurable frisson in watching something that doesn’t quite achieve that level of polish. You see the rapid zooms, the poor framing, the stumbles and flubs (no second takes, here) and soft or weak focusing, and it’s a little charming.

- Too much of that sort of thing can be annoying, however. I enjoy semi-pro video production in the same way I enjoy fanzines: I think their attempts to rise to a professional level make these videos… I don’t know, cute? I don’t want to just say “charming” again, but I suppose that’s the better term. Anyway, I’m predisposed to be a little affectionate about this kind of thing.

- Conversely, while some people might enjoy it, I can’t get into the jerky home movie handicam style of video. The wild panning, which results in nothing so much as a wash of psychedelic smears of color, the bad audio, the incomprehensible purposes behind these creations – it’s just not for me. Do a search for “I’m bored” on YouTube sometime (if you happen to be bored), and you’ll find some really unwatchable shit. But, it’s an aesthetic that might grab some people. At least they know where they can find it.

- Whilst looking for Joy Division covers (I’m a hopelessly nostalgic goon, I’m afraid) I stumbled across a video by a 15 year old kid who does these amazing note-for-note recreations of songs from some of my favorite bands. (At least, when I was a teenager, they were.) This inspired a certain amount of joy ("Hurray! Maybe kids today don’t universally have terrible taste in music!”), but also a corresponding amount of pain (“Boo! This kid is a freaking musical prodigy with a home studio, who can play every rock instrument that exists, while I’m an fat old bastard who takes twenty minutes to work his way through an eight-note scale, and hasn’t ever played a barre chord without completely farking it up!) Then I remembered how I’m not supposed to look upon the successes of other people as opportunities to beat myself up, but it didn’t help much. Still, good for ya’, wunderkind.

- I can’t claim that my viewing of an official music video from some random band is likely to make me run over to the music store to pick up their CD, but I can still make a case for bands and record companies to allow their videos to be posted. Google let’s one find music by simply typing in a lyric or two of a song whose title and artist has completely slipped my mind; but YouTube allows me to confirm almost instantly whether or not the song in question is the one I’m after. These special, earworm types of songs are the ones I’m most likely to buy off iTunes. So, people, please post your songs (with lyrics, if applicable) so I can send a buck or two your way, huh?

| April 18th, 2009 | by BCSilvia | Categories: Art, Music, Pop Culture, Science & Technology | Tags: | Trackback | No Comments »



Daily Purpose

Saturday, April 18th, 2009

Last week’s episode of 30 Rock dealt, in some small way, with the effects some people can feel when they don’t have a job to go to everyday. There are those who need the pressure, the stress, the grinding frustration that only a workplace can provide, apparently. This line of thinking is nothing new — the world is full of stories that warn of the dangers of idleness. People need gainful employment, something to do, a sense of being useful, they say.

Well, maybe it’s true for some people; Type A personalities, if you believe in that sort of thing. But I highly doubt that this applies to everybody – or even a large percentage of people. It’s all a little too pat, isn’t it? Can I be an idle rich person someday? No, no – you couldn’t handle it — it would destroy you. Now return to your toil, prole.

Secular society or not, many faith-based ideas are still with us, impacting our day to day lives. The Protestant Work Ethic is one example. Work is a holy thing to many people. Or you could say that they find it’s important to them because it represents greater material wealth, or fulfills some sense of purpose (should they happen to require one), or that some define themselves not by who the are socially, but by what they do professionally, or whatever else. Holy should suffice as a description for now.

Why should this be the way of things? Why should the sudden lack of work be so damaging to the human spirit? Well, if you are in serious financial straights, the answer is obvious. The weight of your debts combined with an inability to pay them off either now or in the immediate future is a tremendous source of justifiable anxiety. Of course not having a job can be crushing those circumstances.

No longer having to work because one doesn’t have to in order to maintain one’s lifestyle is a special case, then. Still, we’re told that not having a job, even if you are financially well-off, can be detrimental to one’s state of mind. The examples we’re often shown have to do with working people who experience sudden windfalls, like winning the lottery.

There might be some bias with regard to these stories — why would the media spend any time covering people who are living comfortably off their winnings via rational resource management? There must be at least one winner out there fitting this description.

Conversely, why — if idle wealth leads to an enervation of the mind and spirit — do we almost never hear stories about whole families of fabulously wealthy non-working people losing their minds due to lack of purpose? Oh sure, we get the occasional story of the dim heiress who forgets to put her underwear on before leaving the house. And sometimes you’ll see a tell-all revealing dirty family laundry from several generations back, but not all that often.

How do they do it? Is it because they read good books? Or is it because of their charity work? Or do they just have enough money to hush these things up? More than likely, it has something to do with the fact that, after several generations of not having to work for a living, the idle classes have developed an innate adaptation to the easy life. An adaptation that people who work for a living, and whose parents worked for a living, do not have.

To some extent, I think this is horse-hockey. I think that the spectrum of human behavior is far too broad to draw the conclusion that toil is necessary if a working class person is to maintain a healthy mind, in all cases. Many people have interests outside of work that they could pursue to great effect if they didn’t have to spend a third of their lives preparing for, traveling to, and working at a place of employment.

Part of the problem that comes with thinking about this issue is simply that it’s impossible to really separate the idealistic, imaginary wonder-world of a post-work society, from the gut-twisting anxiety of real unemployment in the world we live in. In science fiction we see how such worlds might work, where folks don’t have to have a job, but all the interesting people are in Starfleet anyway. We can imagine these worlds, but we can’t imagine interesting stories from our perspective unless there are people on missions who didn’t have to go; or we tell tales of Utopias that are untenable for ethical reasons. Because stories of Edens that don’t end to with a serpent are boring. “Everyone was happy and fulfilled, and had few conflicts with others. Uh, The End.”

The instinct that tells us that not having to work would be a burden is the same one that sours tales of Utopia; it’s the instinct that tells us if we give a human being a good thing, he or she will find a way to fuck it all up. Human nature strikes again! This is why we can’t have nice technological paradises.

I don’t believe that this is necessarily the case. If we somehow found a way to eliminate toil tomorrow, it would no doubt take a generation or two to get everybody settled in. But it would happen, eventually. All those idle rich folks are the ancestors of people who didn’t start out wealthy, after all. If they can do it, I’m willing to bet lots and lots of other human beings could manage it.

Of course, this isn’t likely to happen. At the root, a lot of society and the work it requires comes from the fact that certain resources are scarce. We’re probably lucky that anyone is willing to exchange physical goods for human labor. Imagine having to duel someone or fight a gurrilla war every time you wanted a slice of baloney.

So, in the end we may never achieve a post-work world; the people who’d want it the most are not in a position to fight for it; the people who could don’t have to work, so they don’t care; and there are powerful people out there with a vested interest in the current way things are done.

I’m just saying that, if we didn’t have to work in order to have nice houses, fancy TV’s, and awesome vacations to exotic locales, well, we’d probably be able to handle it. But please, feel free to give me a billion dollars to prove me wrong!

Any billionaires with a good sense of humor who might be reading this?

| April 18th, 2009 | by BCSilvia | Categories: Class, Humor, Money & Commerce | Trackback | No Comments »



Site Feeds

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives:

By Category

By Date


Search This Site


RSS Posts at Snappy Patter

RSS Links of Interest

Arts & Entertainment

Books & Literature

Comic Strips

General Interest

Money & Commerce

Politics & Philosophy

Science & Technology

Meta