Posts by Russell Brown
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I wonder how much of an impact it would make if the BBC allowed it's factual content to be freely available to all. I sSuspect allowing those ideas to float freely to would make a bigger impact to global democracy than flushing money in unwanted foreign conflicts.
Ironically, that was the atmosphere of the Beeb's big rethink earlier in the decade -- we want people to see our public-good programmes, so why should we care if they're file-shared? -- but they somehow contrived to go the other way entirely.
It rankles me slightly that TVNZ blocks international traffic to it's factual content. That knife, it cuts both ways.
I used that TVNZ ondemand "this content is not available outside New Zealand" grab you did for me in my Webstock speech, alongside the equivalents from Hulu and iPlayer, to illustrate why TV is not the Web. Yet.
-
Can't speak for Giovanni, but I'd probably take it. I feel pretty squirmy at times, but ethically I'm no Mark Harris on this issue: have done, will do, probably until the law or me ISP stops me.
Me too, but not without ethical boundary. I hate the idea of downloading an artist's lifetime catalogue via BitTorrent (oddly enough, the people I know who do do that are or have been musicians) but feel no pang about using MP3 blogs to find new music. I'll grab interesting TV, especially if I'm unlikely to see it onscreen here, but I don't do box-office movies, because they get here in a timely fashion these days. Because the Daily Show is on C4 hours after its US broadcast I don't need to get that off the internet, which is great.
One issue with BBC programming that should be discussed more is the role of the Beeb's commercial arm, BBC Worldwide. It's often regarded as a brilliant success because of the money it brings in -- mostly through sales of formats rather than actual programmes. In my view, it's a great part of the problem. There are huge swathes of BBC factual programming that local broadcasters either have shoved at them in unattractive packages or can't buy at all.
Even pure public service programmes such as the <i>Briefings</i> series can't be viewed online either, if you're outside the UK. Even if you're resident in Britain, you'll find that the BBC retires <i>Briefings</i> from iPlayer a month after broadcast. The official iPlayer message cites copyright as the reason for yanking the content. My arse. <i>Briefings</i> is a couple of cameras pointed at someone speaking in a room at Westminster. No one but the BBC is in a position to assert copyright over it, and it won't. The Beeb is kneecapping itself.
You can of course still see <i>Briefings</i>. Perhaps on Google Video, more likely via BitTorrent. UKNova is serving the BBC vision better than BBC Worldwide is. That's ironic.
-
My final thought for the evening ...
Is it stealing if I fast-forward through the ads on the MySky?
-
Creative Commons is a great start, creating a framework for people to opt out of old copyright. Now there's the small matter of how to look after everyone else (really, Giovanni? Why don't you tell us more?)
Well, you do already have your guest-poster permit ...
I think one of the important things about Creative Commons is its simplicity. It creates very simple classes of use -- although definitions in the real world get very tricky: have I breached CC:NC if I share something in a blog with a couple of ads in it?
Oh hang on ... I'm just continuing my last post now. Sorry. I'll stop now. Cheers.
-
__Kinda, but not really. If at any time up till last November I had copied songs from a CD I'd bought to my iPod, I too would have been committing "theft" . I didn't have the right to copy it.__
And if we fixed the stupid law to allow for that possibility, would you see the disconnect, or still not?
The law was "fixed", over the strenuous objections of the rights-holders, for whom home taping was still killing music, although it's still hedged around with conditions that people won't even be aware of.
But we're now down to some breaches of copyright being theft and some not. Exactly which ones you pick become a matter of taste and judgement. Which is actually how we all navigate copyright law.
But if I grab a track from an MP3 blog and decide I don't like it and won't get the album, is that theft? Have I really deprived an artist of a sale? Is it different if I audition it on Hype Machine? Should an infringing copy always be measured as a lost sale?
Then there's television. I'll cheerfully give you a list of rationalisations for downloading interesting TV shows that probably won't screen here (especially any time soon).
Let's say I hand you a flash drive containing all three episodes of The Biggest Chinese Restaurant in the World , from BBC4's Storyville strand -- which may turn up in five years at midnight on the Documentary Channel but because of the quirks of the TV market isn't even offered to NZ broadcasters. It's the most intriguing and useful take on the modernisation of China that I've seen on a screen.
Do you take it?
Might I tempt you with 'Let There Be Light', a recent programme from Alan Yentob's long-running BBC Imagine strand that presents "light art" in a way that I found moving to the point of being momentarily disturbing?
Well, do you?
It's a fuzzy line, which makes me uncomfortable about highly-charged words that aren't reflected in actual copyright law.
But mainly, I digressed because the stealing/infringement debate seems to be perfectly circular :-)
-
The analogy is pretty simple: I steal a CD ni a shop, I'm a thief. I download the same tracks and burn them in the exact same order on a CD, and it's not theft. Surely you see the disconnect?
Kinda, but not really. If at any time up till last November I had copied songs from a CD I'd bought to my iPod, I too would have been committing "theft" . I didn't have the right to copy it.
-
you called him out on it without presenting the actual document or context which lead to others using it as a basis to discredit his word.
Really Rob, fuck off. I don't know what your problem is but I'd rather not have to deal with it.
I didn't even raise the issue in the first place. I pointed to the post I wrote about it at the time, which if you'd bothered to read it, you would have seen was not unsympathetic towards Campbell, who I know and like, our differences on issues notwithstanding. My opinion remains that he was unwise to bring his artists into it in the way he did.
Now, I really have finished attempting to have an adult discussion that involves you. I haven't responded in kind to the various nasty things you've said about me and my work since you started posted on my site, and I don't think I'll be able to maintain that if I continue to engage with you.
-
He also attributed this to piracy- and not some of them being- well, perhaps past peak popularity. That's debatable, but I doubt any of us can be certain one way or the other.
Except for Campbell, who was very certain. But as Bic said, NZ-musician-has-a-day-job" is hardly breaing news.
My personal view is that he was unwise to say what he did.
-
anyone bothered to call the person who made that statement and get some elaboration on the thinking of it?
quoted like that it doesn't make logical sense. is there a context for it?For the third or fourth time, it's a direct quote from the RIANZ submission to the Commerce select committee. Why don't you look it up for yourself?
oh come on russell, this is the sort of thing that disappoints me from you. You know full well and the comment record shows the one point I picked you up on was the let them rot comment.
You painted it in black and white and I filled in the grey.This is as maddening as ever. I think I've explained what I said to the extent that I can.
I've tried to talk about the issues in good faith. Someone else can bang their head against the wall now if they like. I have more important things to do.
-
And, further, "it is submitted that libraries and archives should not be permitted to make sound recordings or films available both in terminals on-site or terminals off-site and that such rights are not necessary for their proper functioning and operation."
This was my favourite part. It equates to saying that libraries should be allowed to keep books but never let anyone read them.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 1681 1682 1683 1684 1685 … 2279 Older→ First