It's a new sun to me (nukem777) Mon 22 Aug 05 07:10
#75 hidden for length and possible diversion of the conversation.
virtual community or butter? (bumbaugh) Mon 22 Aug 05 09:30
I'm fascinated by the psychological facets of Bruce Forest. There are a lot of "collectors" like that, i'm sure. How many are pushing that sort of marketing approach, though? It's a very serious buzz that could be built that way....
virtual community or butter? (bumbaugh) Mon 22 Aug 05 15:34
John Adams writes from off-Well: A bit off-topic for J. D. Lasica's discussion... ....but I thought I'd let you make the call. This'll be going up at my weblog at O'Reilly shortly (I'm going to let my editor glance at the sentence in another section where I refer to someone as ruthless). If this is on-topic enough, it's postable; if it's slightly off-topic but worth seeing, or if you want it in all its linky marked-up goodness, I'll send you a link when it's up; if you think I've veered pretty far off, let it go. Garth Brooks: Now we get to the scary stuff. Garth Brooks has changed labels. He's dropped EMI Capitol in favor of...make sure you're seated...in fact, let me ROT-13 it for you: Jny-Zneg. That's right. If you want your new Garth Brooks multi-disc set, you have to go to Wal-Mart. From Anita French's story: Wal-Mart's deal with Brooks marks the first time an artist has aligned his entire catalog with one chain. Although neither Brooks nor Wal-Mart would comment on the first arrival under the pact, industry sources say that it will be a multiple-disc box set including previously unreleased material. As Ebeneezer Scrooge's old business partner, Sam Marley, used to sing as he counted the day's receipts: If you are a long tail Then I am a short axe Sharpened to cut off your head Ready to cut off your head I haven't done the calculations, but I'd guess there are two or three hundred acts for whom a deal like this would make sense strictly on their numbers. Probably a third of them are too tied to their current contracts to make such a deal, and of those remaining, probably half of them aren't suitable for reasons of demographics, content, or philosophical disagreement. (Survey question: Who is more hated, the recording industry or Wal-Mart?) That leaves around a hundred top acts ready, willing, and able to divert those obscene profits away from the record companies. Isn't that great news? Is Amazon cut out of the deal? Apparently so. The deal covers Wal-Mart, walmart.com, and Sam's Club. What about Apple--will Garth Brooks downloads come from walmart.com only? That's not yet clear. Wal-Mart related? What isn't? Thanks, John A see me fulminate at http://www.jzip.org/
JD Lasica (jd) Mon 22 Aug 05 17:25
Wow, a lot of subjects here to contend with. First, check out nukem777's Hidden Response, well worth reading. In which he aptly describes the changing of the cultural guard as we transition from the analog age of scarcity into a cut-and-paste digital world where bits are abundant. In a agree that a wakeup call and blowback are going to a blosophere near you, courtesy of Hollywood and the entrenched media, who are going to use all the laws and regulations they so lavishly paid for. I don't think it will be the EFF that defines the rules of the cyberroad -- instead, I think it will be the hundreds of thousands (soon millions) of us participating in citizen media sites like Ourmedia.org, NowPublic.com, Odeo, Brightcove, Akimbo, Bayosphere and other places where this intersection is happening most directly. It's nice to think that we'll be able to come to a meeting of the minds about these new societal realities in order to form a more perfect holistic union. But I think politics is about power, and that's why in the short run we're at a disadvantage. Until we mobilize ordinary users of digital technologies and educate them about what's at stake, the advantage will lie with Hollywood and big media, and it will take 10 or more years for "our" side to level the playing field. (The hostility on Capitol Hill to many of the views we take for granted is palpable.) As for Garth Brooks, Wal-mart, Amazon, iTunes and the major record labels: I think we're seeing the beginning of an epic battle for artists' hearts, minds and wallets. Once a few first movers blaze the trail and show that such a move can be financially lucrative, get off the street because you'll see a stampede.
It's a new sun to me (nukem777) Mon 22 Aug 05 18:11
Welp, then, I guess we need to tie our agenda into our new media-savvy type politicos running under the progressive banner the next few elections. And support those who actually are tech-savvy and aware of some of the issues already representing us or someone like us in Washington...
Jon Lebkowsky (jonl) Mon 22 Aug 05 19:18
JD, how has the Digital Millennium Copyright Act gone beyond issues of infringement, and been used to stifle competition?
JD Lasica (jd) Mon 22 Aug 05 22:48
Corporations are increasingly using the DMCA to protect their brands and their bottom lines from assault in cases that have nothing to do with traditional infringement: - When financial hardship led Jose Avila to build furniture from FedEx packing materials and to post photos of his works on his FedexFurniture.com website, FedEx's legal department came after him under the DMCA. http://www.newstarget.com/010826.html - When the company Health Advocate was upset that users could unearth web pages dating back to 1999 using the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine, it filed a suit, partly under the DMCA. http://p2pnet.net/story/5552 - Lots of other examples involving garage door openers and the like. In "Darknet" I focused not on these absurd examples of corporate hijinks, but on the ways in which the DMCA empowers corporations -- at the expense of the public -- to lock down their products, gadgets and content in ways that have never been possible before, adding the layer of federal law on top of technological restrictions. Princeton Prof. Edward Felten (who writes the Freedom to Tinker blog) says the DMCA essentially turns the gizmos we buy into "black boxes" that we are forbidden to take apart or tinker with, a dramatic departure from what society has been doing for generations. He's right.
It's a new sun to me (nukem777) Tue 23 Aug 05 07:48
Europe just disallowed Microsoft's ability to use their thousands of patents to stifle competition and free trade. Can you talk a bit about the way Europe and Asia approach free trade and how their business practices will both be taken into account and influence the development of these issues once we break out of our own economic/political models? Another way of looking at this is that there is a battle going on here in the homeland (Hollywood, etc. and all their various proxies and minions in Congress) and then there is the rest of the world. On the one hand we intend to influence the rest of the world by what we temporize in Congress regarding fair use, file trading, etc. On the other, the world is doing business in fairly different and creative ways and just may not play ball, rather may have the final say or at least a large influence on what finally results. File traders, purchasers, and content providers are now without borders, so just because Washington says it's got to be their way does not make it necessarily so. Hollywood seems to want to take the old road and tie everyone up in court, but the sheer numbers of new sites, files and users will eventually overwhelm even their lawyers and make it economically disadvantageous to pursue that course of action. It will take a while, but one strategy is to feed that fire.
JD Lasica (jd) Tue 23 Aug 05 12:31
I intentionally avoided discussion of patents in "Darknet" because other authors have covered the topic and copyright was a tough enough subject to make accessible to a general audience without delving into patents. You're quite right, nukem, that U.S. laws stop at the border and the rest of the world may not way to play ball. But more and more countries are surprisingly caving in to the U.S. government's approach to intellectual property, alas, and ignoring their own traditions. The Berne convention and WIPO treaties seek to "harmonize" IP laws across borders, which is just another way of saying that the U.S. is bullying Europe, Australia and other regions to extend the length of copyright protections to meet the U.S.'s criteria (95 years for a corporation, or 70 years after the death of an author). Here's a recent Wired News story about the Europen Union's efforts to make indirect copyright infringement a crime across Europe: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,68418,00.html?tw=newsletter_topstori es_html As for "feeding the fire" ... while I don't advocate darknet activity, I think it's inevitable that millions of people will be doing precisely that if the laws become unreasonable in their countries. What I do advocate is people taking up the tools of digital creativity to rip, mix and burn their culture. The more people who do that, the less likely legislators will be to try to turn back the clock on what we're becoming accustomed to doing in the digital age.
It's a new sun to me (nukem777) Wed 24 Aug 05 22:30
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/76645/warner-music-poised-to-launch-an-elabel.html well, apparently someone at Warner Brothers Music is getting it. Interestingly, they are allowing the artists to retain ownership of the recordings and copyrights, pretty much what you have been talking about (jd).
JD Lasica (jd) Thu 25 Aug 05 12:34
That's welcome (and unexpected) news, nukem, thanks for pointing it out. It will take years, but all the music companies will eventually pursue a similar path.
Jon Lebkowsky (jonl) Thu 25 Aug 05 16:52
We've talked a lot about the legal and technical implications of digital distribution, but what are the cultural implications? Assuming we "win" and IP is seen more realistically for the digital world we're sloshing around in, what will that world look like, ultimately?
JD Lasica (jd) Thu 25 Aug 05 20:23
Great question, Jon. I think we're in for a transitional decade immediately ahead, with the digital culture wars heating up for several years before the kids who are growing up with this technology today and internalizing it come into positions of power and influence. When that happens, it will be a world where ubiquity trumps scarcity, openness wins out over closed proprietary systems, digital content and media are not device-dependent, and content moves fluidly from one manifestation (a handheld device) to another (a 50-foot projection wall). We'll carry around libraries of media with us, on keychains or as fashion accessories. And we'll be able to access media that are not in our personal collections on demand, some of it paid, some of it free. I like the comment of pho founder Jim Griffin, whom I quote in the book verily: "The kind of media world our kids grow up in will be so different from our own, but to them, it will just be the natural order of things. Theyll grow up in a world where entertainment and most art and intellectual property will be fluid and friction-free. The idea that a song could be recorded and moved effortlessly over a network or even wirelessly to a cell phone will seem normal. And the idea that this can be stoppedthrough legislation or a piece of software code or a shrink-wrap contract or a misleading educational campaignwill be preposterous to them.
It's a new sun to me (nukem777) Fri 26 Aug 05 07:09
Great overview (jd)...something quite basic will be changing as well, the collective consciousness...this new remix, digital post-human generation will not only live within a completely new and assumed technological model, but also a new eidetic (way of knowing) model...a collective consciousness, rather than the traditional model of each individual absorbing and integrating as much or as little knowledge as possible...info will be readily available, easily searchable - by bot! -and as easily shared; collaboration and an assumed global connectivity will be simply a given. So one big shift will be the individual's intuitive understanding that (s)he is a part a shared consciousness, rather than the more existential situation of the past 200 years or so. I think that's how it's going to go? This will lead to all sorts of new models regarding learning, vocation, social organization, etc. We are already seeing it in the new social models like Omidyar and many others. Now that blogs are using RSS feeds and back tracking this borg -like model should develop fairly quickly. This is more of a sense of what's up, there's no way for us old dogs to really get a handle on it, one, because we just don't think that way, and, two, because as the new post-human generation comes into their own they will define and develop the models as they go, so it's too early to get a fix.
Hal Royaltey (hal) Fri 26 Aug 05 11:56
I'll just slip in here to thank JD and Jon for a great interview. Our two weeks have passed far too quickly. Luckily the conversation can, in typical WELL style, go on for much longer. Off-WELL posters may continue to submit comments to the hosts (firstname.lastname@example.org) and WELL members may post away. Thanks again guys!
Gail Williams (gail) Fri 26 Aug 05 11:59
Fascinating stuff. Thanks!
Jon Lebkowsky (jonl) Fri 26 Aug 05 13:28
Thanks, Hal, and thanks to JD and everyone who joined the conversation!
It's a new sun to me (nukem777) Fri 26 Aug 05 15:26
thanks (jonl) for your excellent moderation and (jd) for a great look at an some important issues facing the digital world.
JD Lasica (jd) Sun 28 Aug 05 01:47
Always an honor to engage in an elevated discourse with members of the WELL. Yes, let's continue the conversation, on the WELL and Darknet.com, by contributing your own works to citizens media sites like Ourmedia.org, Flickr.com and NowPublic.com, and by supporting groups fighting the good fight, like PublicKnowledge.org and EFF.org!
Emily J. Gertz (emilyg) Mon 29 Aug 05 01:02
Thanks jon and jd, for the excellent interview.
Members: Enter the conference to participate
Non-members: How to participate