COPYCENSE

"The Internet offers unprecedented possibilities for human creativity, global communication, and access to information. Yet digital technology also invites new forms of information enclosure. In the last decade, mass media companies have developed methods of control that undermine the public’s traditional rights to use, share, and reproduce information and ideas. These technologies, combined with dramatic consolidation in the media industry and new laws that increase its control over intellectual products, threaten to undermine the political discourse, free speech, and creativity needed for a healthy democracy.

"In response to the crisis, librarians, cyber-activists, and other public interest advocates have sought ways to expand access to the wealth of resources that the Internet promises, and have begun to build online communities, or "commons," for producing and sharing information, creative works, and democratic discussion. This report documents the information commons movement, explains its importance, and outlines the theories and "best practices" that have developed to assist its growth."

Nancy Kranich. The Information Commons: A Public Policy Report. The Free Expression Policy Project. (.pdf version) 2004.

"Today’s music fan interacts with a "community" that is far larger than anyone ever dreamed possible before the widespread personal use of the Internet. This social networking is changing the way people market and sell music and it’s doing so on a global scale.

"Here’s how: One fan hears a song and ‘tells’ a dozen others online. Each in turn sends the information (and sometimes the entire song file) to another dozen people, and so on. If the song’s hook is catchy and universal enough, the artist can reach thousands of fans in a matter of seconds. It’s fast, it’s easy, it’s free, and it’s global.

"Does this viral communication bring any income for that artist (or songwriter, or publisher, or manager, or agent, or distributor, or record label)? No. But does it provide vital publicity that has the potential to sell singles, albums, concert tickets and merchandise? Absolutely."

eMediaWire. Social Networking and Music Marketing: MySpace.com is Putting It All Together. June 5, 2004.

Ed Foster, a former editor at InfoWorld, recently finished a three-week take on licensing agreements, and some of their egregious terms and restrictions. While Foster is from the software world, his examples of restrictive licensing are from all industries. Given the digital age in which we live, and the trend toward licensing goods rather than selling them (which would allow consumers federal rights under the copyright law’s first sale doctrine), these columns are very important.

Ed Foster. A Good Deal. Ed Foster’s Gripe Log. May 20, 2004.

Ed Foster. EULA Nasties. Ed Foster’s Gripe Log. May 13, 2004.

Ed Foster. Fair Terms. Ed Foster’s Gripe Log. May 6, 2004.

Courtesy of the Creative Commons blog, I have just read an interesting story about how a creator might use the Creative Commons licensing program and still manage to make some money in the process. In particular, the story analyzes Lawrence Lessig‘s decision (along with his publisher, Penguin) to distribute free electronic copies of his new book Free Culture, and the business model any author might use in order to earn money from a creative work in the age of digital reproduction and distribution.

"Let’s say you’ve written a book. A book that is worth publishing. Let’s say you’ve got a publisher for your book. A publisher that people have heard of. What happens when you convince your publisher to give your book away, for free, to anyone who wants it? This isn’t about giving review copies to journalists, this is about converting the book into an electronic format and giving it away to the general public so that they don’t have to spend their hard-earned cash on buying a hardcopy for their hardwood bookshelf.

"If you believed the RIAA and other proponents of draconian copyright legislation, what happens when there is a choice between a free (legal or otherwise) download and a bought physical product, people will choose the free version over the bought version. Thus, say the RIAA, each time the free version is downloaded a sale is lost and the creators (read: rights holders) lose out financially.

"By this logic, giving away your book, even with the consent of your publisher, is a bad idea. Commercial suicide even. It’s not something that any sane author should do, surely?"

Suw Charman. Something for Nothing: The Free Culture AudioBook Project. Chocolate and Vodka. May 24, 2004.

"On a panel a few weeks ago, I asked the head lawyer for Apple’s iTunes Music Store whether Apple would, if it could, drop the FairPlay DRM from tracks purchased at the Music Store," said Fred von Lohmann, counsel for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "He said ‘no.’ I was puzzled, because I assumed that the DRM obligation was imposed by the major labels on a grudging Apple.

"Thanks to the recent Berkman Center report on the iTunes Music Store, I think I understand. Apple’s warm embrace of DRM here is every bit as reprehensible as Lexmark’s effort to use DRM to eliminate interoperable printer cartridges and Chamberlain’s effort to use DRM against replacement garage door clickers."

Electronic Frontier Foundation. FairPlay: Another Anticompetitive Use of DRM. Deep Links. May 25, 2004.

A Copyfighter’s Musings. Welfare Economics of FairPlay and DRM Lock-in. May 15, 2004.

Digital Media Project, Berkman Center for Internet & Society. iTunes: How Copyright, Contract, and Technology Shape the Business of Digital Media. (.pdf) (Green Paper, v. 1.2) April 10, 2004.