Posts by Rob Stowell
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
much younger people than me so dont like to read *books* on 'phones
Oddly enough- not in Japan. This is a curious twist: Cellphone novels recently held four of the top five positions on Japan's best-seller list. It's an interesting read.
-
I know next-to-nothing about T2S, but I'd be surprised if the main reason for disabling it weren't that it'd be a simple way to circumvent the "DRM" built into the kindle. T2S speech sounds dreadful, but is likely to be fairly easily interpreted by, eg Dragon. So the book reads itself into a text file and we're off....
Ok, it's probably a pin-hole in the water-soluable dyke of copyright vs the digital sea. Certainly not a solution to copyright being broken. -
the book is available for free, with people encouraged to buy it if they enjoyed it
And that's pretty close to the new business paradigm: publish and hope. Pay if you feel charitable.
I think this would probably fall into robbery's category of "selling t-shirts"
Mark, if you're thinking of a new career as robbery's spokesperson, you'll need sharper analogies and a more discursive style. ;-)
-
New ideas on the copyright/"everything is free now" front: of Montreal's Skeletal Lamping attempts to combine artworks and music in a range of packages- you can buy tee-shirts and wall decals and lampshades- and they include a code to the digital download.
On the packaging, Barnes explains:"The goal of the Skeletal Lamping Collection is to expand the perception of music packaging beyond traditional flat, square artwork. The album exists in seven different packaging formats: CD, LP, T-shirt, tote bag, button set, paper lantern, and wall decals. Each Item in the Skeletal Lamping Collection includes both the digital album and its unique packaging of the album art. Ideally, every object you bring into your home should feel exceptional to you, otherwise, it just adds to the clutter and chaos of your life. We feel, theres no reason to produce another object that just sits on a shelf. We only want to produce objects that have functionality and can be treasured for their singularity. Objects that can transform a room, bend the mind and inform your dreams."
of Montreal's website has a range of live video, and there's a link from the wiki page to download audio of a gig that appears to be legitimate.
Is this desperate or realistic? Certainly a creative approach- and well-priced products and music. -
Joe, have you seen "Out of Sight, Out of Mind"?
Thanks Sacha, wonder how I might be able to track that down?
Try googling "frank film" in NZ.
Gerard is Chch based, and would probably be happy to talk. The "Eugenics" doco screen about three years ago, I think. (Out of Sight has never been on NZ television, which is truely daft.) -
though that does illustrate nice the issue of perspective and personal investment.
Yeah. That Doledrums site is amazing.
Part of me is thinking: ummm, want that, that, and that, wow, amazing, theres- and all that stuff I've still got on vinyl, but could never be arsed making digital copies of- then, hmmm, encountering recordings of mates, and even something where I paid for most of the recording costs.
I don't really mind. Mildly amused that anyone would bother. It seems like a lot of very genuine fan-love and enthusiasm.
But, y'know, it'd be nice if they asked. -
Excluding (slight misread there-) song lyrics- I guess that makes it better.
-
icompositions sounds great. But this
By uploading music, movies, or other multimedia files to the Service, you grant iCompositions a non-exclusive license to distribute those files to visitors of iCompositions.com, including through our internet radio station and podcasts. Any text submitted to the Service, excluding lyrics and blog entries, becomes property of iCompositions. You grant iCompositions a non-exclusive license to publish blog entries and lyrics throughout iCompositions.com, including in our email newsletter, as we see fit.
is a little worrying, eh? A community where the landlord holds the copyright (to text, at any rate).
-
Don- maybe there's a gap here between "intellectual" and artistic endeavour? FWIW I'm not against copyright lapsing, and I'd probably tend more towards "life plus 20" than "life plus 50". I'm just puzzled noone seems to be able to answer roobery's basic question!
Do you think there's a problem with the current distinctions between the "commons" of ideas (you can't copyright an "idea" for a work- or stop anyone else creating along the same lines), genres, structures etc- and the copyright that does exist on a particular "expression" of those (a "work")? Seems straightforward enough to me- though seldom as simple where the legal rubber hits the road.
But perhaps I'm biased towards creative work and against scientific/technological? (FWIW I think at least some science and technology is marvellously creative). I hate the idea of algorithms (or genes) being patented: it seems to me these are "common goods" which noone should be able to fence off; and perhaps also that they are things more discovered than created. -
What I'm curious about is this sense people are expressing that property is a "natural" right ("natural" is a loaded term, and best handled like a loaded gun;-)) while intellectual property is essentially artificial.
I don't see it.
Property rights- unless you simply mean "possession is nine-tenths of the law"- seem quite artificial to me. (You might have a point if you were simply asserting "might is right"!)
I presume you're refering to what are called principles of natural justice.
Intellectual property is a different sort of property, to be sure, in its "mode of existance": that is, it doesn't inhere in any one physical object.
But as the product human toil, what principles of natural justice would you appeal to, to assert the creator's right to IP be different?
(And please: can we stop talking about people being able to copyright "ideas". It's misleading, because it implies copyright impinges on freedom of thought. And it's bugging me!)