h1

Notes for Free Culture Review

This is more of my thoughts than an actual review.

p.42 Asynchronous time making it easier for critical discourse. Also for people like me to communicate.

p.45 Blogging as noble, heroic even.

p.104 What is easy is not always legal? Maybe about how difficult it is to get rights, how many people you have to ask. not sure.

p.146 Video Pipeline being sued by Disney. What was legal before is now illegal, because of internet. Viewing creates a copy, infringing on copyright, although action is exactly the same as before.

p.152 Alice in Wonderland. “This book cannot be read aloud.” But also, why can’t you give someone or lend someone this book, if it is available for free on the website? Isn’t giving someone a link the same as giving them the book, and therefore also illegal? or, giving them not illegal…

p.196 Requirements for internet radio different. Why? Why do they have to pay performer as well. It’s equally if not more so an advertising medium as longwave radio… Just because corporation on the other side. Also, millions of requirements, how is that even possible to record (user location, timing, original recording, people, length, etc…)

p.200 RIAA knows it can’t win. Looking for scapegoats, examples, not real compensation. Also, sometimes I forget about prohibition, that it actually happened. But zero tolerance creates massive criminalization of ordinary people. “Generations of Americans… can’t live their lives both normally and legally, since ‘normally’ entails a certain degree of illegality. Underage drinking, speeding, music, etc. So, like in previous post, they make ordinary people felons. People who offer for free, don’t.

that is also 202.

p.203 I should make mixes more. True creative art, surprisingly.

p.216 Is this even vaguely legal? people contributing to campaigns in order to incentivize voting in their interests? I mean, technically not bribery, but still… Maybe different since 2004 (campaign finance reform?)

p.238 Lessig feels really bad about this case. But would it have made a difference? Would appealing to the morals have helped more than simply appealing to the law? Probably, yes.

p.282 Does Creative Commons have any power? What right does an independent, non-governmental organization have to regulaate copyright laws. Has it been endorsed. I mean, it’s an amazing great idea but is it legally binding? Perhaps yes, now, since the new white house website is licensed under a creative commons license (check which one)… Accepted by government. But still, legal rights?…

p.284 Back to my original question. Free content increases the value of nonfree content. Therefore, Girltalk offers his stuff for free, so that people will want to buy it, in maybe higher quality ($5 and up did offer the FLAC files). But also, accepting this way of doing things, allowing us not to be criminals, understanding that “all rights reserved” is not the way to go… Respect leads to monetary appreciation. Is that the goal? Maybe. Took long enough to get at this point though, 284 pages in…

p.290 Marking no longer required, odd. I love that little c thing.

Super Interesting, super thought provoking. What changes have been made, what progress, since 2004?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: