(Wiimote, WMD with PPC64 patches and patched Python, Inkscape.)
December 2006 Archives
(Wiimote, WMD with PPC64 patches and patched Python, Inkscape.)
- "The Vista Content Protection specification could very well constitute thelongest suicide note in history."
I am going to be largely offline over christmas and new year. I have a Wiimote to play with from GNU/Linux and will be soldering up a sensor bar for it. I've also got some colour sensors when my soldering station arrives. I also have lots of reading to do and some thinking about exactly what to get up to next year.Have a good Christmas and new year.
- "The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation is funding the Internet Archive to scan rare, unusual and culturally significant books and artworks at a bunch of major institutions, including the Boston Public Library, the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Getty Researc
- "On October 25th, 2006, in Blanch v. Koons, the U.S. Court of Appeals of the Second Circuit ruled on an important case dealing with the fair use of copyrighted material in an artistic, “collage” setting, affirming that artist Jeff Koons' incorporati
- "BoingBoing reader Cameron snapped this photograph of a Edison Laboratory phonograph cylinder container from 1907, covered with anti-copying, anti-piracy fine print: "UPON ANY BREACH OF SAID CONDITION, THE LICENSE TO USE AND VEND THIS RECORD, IMPLIED FROM
- "The Free Software Foundation (FSF) today launched BadVista.org, a campaign with a twofold mission of exposing the harms inflicted on computer users by the new Microsoft Windows Vista and promoting free software alternatives that respect users' security a
- Hacking the wiimote and tghe wii. Links to examples and code.
- DRM-free MP3s of millions of independent music tracks. Including ones you actually want.
- Mr. Ubuntu puts forward the case for free VR
- Real-world badges to advertise that you are looking for DS gamer opponents.
- "The following list sets out some basic things that you should think about before you apply a Creative Commons license to your work."
I'm on myspace. If you are astonishingly cool I'll add you as a friend. Failing that, if you've always wondered what I look like I have photos:http://www.myspace.com/robmyersTo answer your question, this is in a separate compartment to anything I have to do with Free Culture. Much like my Second Life membership...
Sun have made Duke "Free graphics". His graphics are BSD licensed (not BY...), and some are Illustrator postcript files which are a bit difficult to load. So here they are converted to SVG:Duke SVGsOne has some bad artefacts on Duke's-actually what is that? A nose? An eye? Anyway, the red blob isn't very good on one of the images. If anyone can fix that let me know.See Duke's homepage for more info, 3D files and more images. No idea how Duke's freedom interacts with his trademark status. Someone should definitely produce some Duke pr0n to see how this works. ;-)
I read "Promises To Keep".It's a fact-tastic read, crammed with data and diagrams, and a very well argued thesis, with the two places where the argument doesn't follow from the examples sticking out like sore thumbs (these are minor parts of the argument, I mention this simply to emphasize how coherent the rest of the book is).I still have a problem with ACSes, although that is one less problem than I had before reading the book. The balance of privacy and accuracy that the system must strike seems much more plausible from Fisher's description, but someone like me who listens to old Art & Language songs, fantastically obscure electronica and people with cellos and digital delays won't be reflected by any system that tries to be representative by sampling rather than by monitoring the entire network.The problem is that an ACS is still phrased in terms of "incentivisation" and of replacing lost revenue. Comparisons to a "pizza right" aside, I think this argument needs recasting positively and progressively rather than in its current reformist mode. Present it to the record companies as compensation by all means, but let's see if it can work and take it forward as the first genuinely democratic form of patronage.
- "After Parrish died, two rival art dealers entered into a bitter tug of war over his artwork. The battle raged in angry lawsuits from coast to coast. (cf Cutler v. Gilbert) Each dealer claimed to be protecting the Parrish legacy as charges of fraud, count
- "On the homepage it says that Openstudio is an “Experiment in Creativity, Collaboration and Capitalism”."
- "The 13 Most Beautiful Avatars images will be exhibited, in the real-world, at the Italian Academy at New York's Columbia University. For the Ars Virtua show, in Second Life, a 3D replica of this physical exhibition space has been recreated for presentati
They say art killed Pollock, as if that could be!In fact he missed a bend and drove his Ford into a tree. - Art & Language and The Red Crayola.
- "While regular copyright hinders further ‘downstream' copying through its “all rights reserved” rule, CC licensing on this type of site presents the unauthorised copy as available, often even for commercial reuse."
- "The SL art world was abuzz with talk when Tayzia Abattoir bought four of Golam Amadeus' paintings - two of which grace the walls of her Crescent museum in Tabor (233,77,23)."
The latest Lessig letter has lots of good stuff in it:The new CC site design, which is cool.The new license chooser, shaped like a jigsaw and based on intent, which is extremely cool and hopefully will give people more of an idea what they are and aren't allowing when they choose a license.The new license icons, which make the modules much clearer.A nod and a wink about FDL compatibility. As long as this is SFDL compatibility, which would answer all my practical objections, I now think this is a good idea.And a "secondary rights" idea which isn't ideal but which Lessig is open about discussion of, which frankly is better than a perfect idea that isn't open to debate.Take a look:http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7143
The Gowers Report contains some recommended measures regarding enforcement of copyright that should cause concern, but it also has some wonderful new proposals for "Flexibility" in copyright that I personally think are very good news for artists.The Executive Summary on page 11 lists:Recommendation 8: A private copying exception for format shifting.This means that people won't be put off buying your work because they aren't allowed to rip it to their media players. Currently it is illegal to rip music to an iPod in the UK.Recommendation 9: A private copying exception for research.This is good for people undertaking research outside of an academic context. Copying for research in a commercial context was recently removed from Fair Dealing, making mood boards illegal unless you tear up your books.Recommendation 11: An exception for transformative works.This sounds like Transformative Fair Use: "transformative or derivative works, within the parameters of the Berne Three Step Test." This is the measure I would most like to see adopted. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_three-step_test for the Three Step Test.Recommendation 12: An exception for caricature, parody or pastiche.We don't currently have a parody right in the UK, unlike the US, although many people who have got their understanding of copyright law from US web sites and books assume that we do. Parody, pastiche and transformative use together cover much of Fair Use for artists.Recommendation 13: A provision for orphan works.Or at least proposing one to the European Commission. So if you don't set up your estate to handle your work properly after your death it won't be lost, and if you wish to capitalize on work whose rightsholder has disappeared you don't run the risk of suddenly getting sued.We need to start lobbying the government *now* to make sure that these measures are made law.
- "…an avatar consumes 1,752 kWh per year. By comparison, the average human, on a worldwide basis, consumes 2,436 kWh per year. So there you have it: an avatar consumes a bit less energy than a real person, though they're in the same ballpark."
- "George Martin, Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr have produced an album of Beatles mashups. Yes, really. "
- "I've been giving away my books ever since my first novel came out, and boy has it ever made me a bunch of money."
Giving It Away - Forbes.comThe golden age of hundreds of writers who lived off of nothing but their royalties is bunkum. Throughout history, writers have relied on day jobs, teaching, grants, inheritances, translation, licensing and other varied sources to make ends meet. The Internet not only sells more books for me, it also gives me more opportunities to earn my keep through writing-related activities.The same is true for artists.
- Record company boss tells his kids off if they "steal" music but record companies would bankrupt your kids if they did the same.
- A mediaeval bestiary
- Does what it says on the tin. Silly use of a CC license for code though.
- "The Arts Council England and OpenBusiness.cc announce the release of a report, which represents the results of a six-month study into artists' attitudes towards copyright, creativity and alternative licensing practises, in particular Creative Commons (
Can DRM be applied to CC work?According to Mia Garlick, to one third party who has spoken to CC, and by a close reading of the license, yes. As long as that DRM does not remove any rights the license gives the user.Can CC work be distributed with DRM added?Again yes, according to the same sources and with the same proviso.Who has the right to add DRM to CC work?According to Mia's responses to the draft comments, possibly only the copyright holder(s?). This would mean that only the original author and authors of derivative works could add DRM. End users would not be able to.What about Fair Use?The CC licenses state that nothing in them is intended to reduce Fair Use. But adding DRM has the potential to reduce Fair Use in unintended ways. Any addition of DRM therefore has at least the potential to reduce Fair Use. This might mean that no DRM can be added, as any DRM removes the Fair Use rights guaranteed (although not granted) by the license.What about noncommercial copying?All the licenses allow at the very least noncommercial copying of unmodified work. DRM can be used to prevent this. But is this a right guaranteed by the license or merely a permission offered by it?What does this mean for dual distribution?Ironically, given the terms of this debate, it means that it may mean that the novel element of dual distribution would be the requirement to provide a transparent, non-DRM copy.Should a transparent copy clause be added?I do not like dual distribution clauses for cultural works and they do not sit well with CC's style of remix culture licensing. It would be very difficult to get right. We would need to look at the FDL/SFDL, which have a similar requirement. I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, I may not be representing people's views correctly, this post is more an enquiry than a statement.
If you cannot chareg to support the making of your art, and people cannot charge for keeping or sharing your art, that art is a financial burden. The more involved the creation of your art and the larger it is as a resource copy, the greater the burden. This burden can be great enough to prevent the creation of work, and may effect the distribution of it as well. Fortunately CC wrote an exception for the new generation of media corporations into the NC license, but that doesn't apply to creators.People relying on NC to make a reputation for themselves, or people trying to create an ideologically pure anti-corporate culture will find it hard to compete as anything other than amateurs if they must work to support the creation or distribution of their work rather than being free to profit from it.An ostentatious, destructively burdensome resource is commonly called a white elephant. NC creates not a reputation or gift economy but a white elephant economy. And in popular culture white elephants always bankrupt their owners.
http://www.negativland.com/riaa/tenets.htmlMaking media- any media- is expensive. It requires substantial up front investments in time and manufactured goods to create, duplicate, and distribute anything. The courts' easy reliance on a not-for-profit standard for fair use ignores the reality that artists, no matter what they choose to do, need to support themselves and their work with a return on their investment just like everyone else. The currently applied 'nonprofit' standard simple assures that only the independently wealthy may dabble in fair use.An excellent essay on Fair Use by Negativland that is equally relevent to NC
