The Minute Memes project: reframing copyright restrictions one idea at a time, through a series of short, captivating, classroom-ready videos by award-winning artist and animator Nina Paley.
The Four Freedoms of Free Culture
In my endless attempt to explain what's wrong with Creative Commons' "non-commercial" and "no derivatives" restrictions, I came across this 2005 article by Benjamin Mako Hill:
Free Software's fundamental document is Richard Stallman's Free Software Definitions (FSD) [3]. At its core, the FSD lists four freedoms:
- The freedom to run the program, for any purpose;
- The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs;
- The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor;
- The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits;
...For the CC founders and many of CC's advocates, FOSS's success is a source of inspiration. However, despite CC's stated desire to learn from and build upon the example of the free software movement, CC sets no defined limits and promises no freedoms, no rights, and no fixed qualities. Free software's success is built upon an ethical position. CC sets no such standard.
This has led to a proliferation of harmful and incompatible CC-NC and CC-ND licensed works, mistakenly labeled "Free." Mako Hill points out that while Creative Commons pursued its goal of "Balance, compromise, and moderation," it failed to define or defend any core freedoms. Indeed, there seems to be no concern about what the "Free" in Free Culture means. To most it means, "slightly less restrictive than modern copyright." Even so, most CC licenses are more restrictive than pre-1970's copyright (because modern copyright's extended terms and more draconian punishments for infringements still apply).
Fortunately the Four Freedoms of Free Software easily apply to Culture:
- the freedom to use the work and enjoy the benefits of using it
- the freedom to study the work and to apply knowledge acquired from it
- the freedom to make and redistribute copies, in whole or in part, of the information or expression
- the freedom to make changes and improvements, and to distribute derivative works
That's not so hard, is it?
Ironically I was arguing with Richard Stallman last month about the Free Software Foundation's use of -ND licenses on its cultural works. A film they sponsored, Patent Absurdity, has "no derivatives" restrictions even though it could be greatly improved by editing, and clips could be highly beneficial in other works. Freedom #4 FAIL. Even the FSF fails to apply the Four Freedoms to Culture!
Software IS culture. Many in the Free Software Movement draw a false distinction between "utility" and "aesthetics," claiming software is useful and culture is just pretty or entertaining. But you never know how a cultural work might prove useful to someone else down the line. If you treat it as non-useful, and restrict it to prevent other uses, then of course it won't be useful - you've restricted its utility through an unFree license.
The Free Software community needs to learn that Software is Culture. The Free Culture community needs to learn that Free is Free.
FREE. CULTURE. It’s not so hard.
Nina Paley Wins IP3 Award from Public Knowledge!
Congratulations to our artist-in-residence Nina Paley, whom we just learned has won a 2010 "IP3" award from Public Knowledge! She's in good company: this year's other winners are Pamela Samuelson, Susan Crawford, and Michael Geist, all names well known to those who follow copyright and Internet freedom. The IP3 awards are given to
individuals who over the past year (or over the course of their careers) who have advanced the public interest in one of the three areas of 'IP' –Intellectual Property, Information Policy and Internet Protocol
and will be presented at a ceremony in Washington, D.C. on October 13th.
Congratulations, Nina — you've earned it!
The BookLiberator.
We had great attendance at our vendor table at the HOPE conference this weekend, where the BookLiberator prototypes attracted a tremendous amount of interest (even getting an excellent writeup on Forbes.com).
Update (2010-07-29): we're now taking pre-pre-orders! Sign up here to be notified when the BookLiberators are available from our online store. There's no commitment. We'll send you an email when they're ready, and then you decide if you want one.
The BookLiberator is an affordable personal book digitizer. Working with Ian Sullivan and James Vasile, who came up with the design, we've just finalized the hardware setup and are now proceeding to manufacturing. We want to have them for sale at our online store as soon as possible; we're aiming for a price of appx $120 for the kit plus around $200 for the pair of cameras (many customers will already have consumer-grade digital cameras, so we'll offer the BookLiberator with and without).
What does the BookLiberator have to do with reframing copyright?
Electronic Frontier Foundation celebrates 20 years with new animation from Nina Paley.
Happy 20th Birthday, Electronic Frontier Foundation! In celebration of 20 years of the EFF, Nina Paley created this short animation (sound by Greg Sextro):
Share via Youtube
Download at archive.org
Nina Paley is artist-in-residence here at Question Copyright, and we're including this video in the Minute Memes series she's doing. Copyright + Internet = Surveillance. We think your computer should work for you. So does the EFF. But not every government agrees — around the world, the copyright monopoly lobby wants Internet service providers to monitor their customers, filtering content and kicking people who share culture off the Internet. They're pushing for so-called "three strikes" laws that would require ISPs to cut off the Internet connection of anyone who shares illegally three times.
Who do you want your computer to work for? The entertainment industry, or you and your friends?
Happy birthday, EFF, and keep up the good work!
Advertising Revenue Under a Creator Endorsement Model
The "Creator Endorsed" concept is a very robust way of monetizing creative works, and can be adapted to many different strategies. Here, I want to suggest an advertising-based model which resembles syndicated television.
CopySouth Conference in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, coming up!
Third CopySouth Workshop
International Conference on Copyright Issues
The CopySouth Research Group is holding a conference in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil at the end of June.
The CSRG is the source of the wonderful Copy/South Dossier and the Alternative Primer on National and International Copyright Law, which we've written about here before. Here's their announcement about the conference...
The CopySouth Research Group (CSRG) invites you to attend and join in the debates at its three day international conference on copyright to be held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil at the end of June.
GAO Report Debunks Claims that Piracy is a Major Threat to U.S. Economy
Our legal intern Victor Cohen noticed a curious juxtaposition recently:
At the same the copyright industry was saying unauthorized copying is more of a threat than ever to economic health, the U.S. government was saying... it's not. Or at least, that there's no convincing evidence it is. Thanks to Victor for writing up this analysis, and, along the way, for calling out the GAO on their confusion of counterfeiting and unauthorized copying — a frequent problem with the U.S. government and one we've noted before.
A couple of months ago, a collection of seven entertainment industry groups including the RIAA, the MPAA, and the Screen Actor's Guild submitted a filing in response to the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator's request for comments on its upcoming "Joint Strategic Plan" to carry out its enforcement duties. Their main concern is that digital piracy "undermines our economy, steals our jobs and threatens our national interest." [1] As a remedy, the industry puts forward a breathtakingly draconian wishlist of enforcement measures, including:
-
ISP-level monitoring and filtering of files or traffic, website blocking and redirection, bandwidth throttling, and monitoring software installed on individual users' computers to check for copyright infringement. [2]
-
Bypassing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's notice-and-takedown procedure by allowing copyright owners to create databases of works or digital files and force ISPs — in order to qualify for the DMCA § 512 safe harbor — to automatically take down any matching content uploaded to their network and to prevent matching content from being uploaded or linked to at all. [3]
-
Making the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security follow the industry's schedule by coordinating piracy interdiction efforts with new releases of blockbuster movies. [4]
In order to argue for such a staggering array of privacy invasions, network neutrality violations, ISP-burdening expansions of the DMCA, and reallocations of federal agents away from preventing more life-threatening crimes, the industry groups that made this filing must have a solid mountain of evidence that piracy poses a major threat to the American economy and the very existence of the entertainment industry, right?
Internet Archive launches new service for the print-disabled: free access to over 1 million books, including current titles.
The Internet Archive launched a new service yesterday, bringing free access to more than 1 million books in the specially designed format to support those who are blind, dyslexic or are otherwise print-impaired.
This is great news just in terms of giving so many people easier access to books, but it's also interesting as an application of a little-known provision of U.S. copyright law — the Chafee Amendment of 1996, which states:
"...it is not an infringement of copyright for an authorized entity to reproduce or to distribute copies or phonorecords of a previously published, nondramatic literary work if such copies or phonorecords are reproduced or distributed in specialized formats exclusively for use by blind or other persons with disabilities."
The new service demonstrates the principle behind the Chafee Amendment: that copyright is a conditional monopoly, not a property right, and that when we decide the monopoly is hampering an important public purpose, we can change it. The Chafee Amendment is an open acknowledgement that monopoly-based distribution was not serving the needs of the blind, the visually impaired, or dyslexic people very well, and that fixing that situation is simply a policy decision. It reminds us that copyright itself is a policy decision, and that if it is not serving the public well, we can change the policy.
The Internet Archive's press release is below:
More than doubling the number of books available to print disabled people of all ages, today the Internet Archive launched a new service that brings free access to more than 1 million books — from classic 19th century fiction and current novels to technical guides and research materials — now available in the specially designed format to support those who are blind, dyslexic or are otherwise visually impaired.
“Every person deserves the opportunity to enhance their lives through access to the books that teach, entertain and inspire,” said Brewster Kahle, founder and Digital Librarian of the Internet Archive. “Bringing access to huge libraries of books to the blind and print disabled is truly one of benefits of the digital revolution.”
Kahle also announced that the Internet Archive will be investing in the growth of its virtual bookshelf by funding the digitization of the first 10,000 books donated. Individuals and organizations are welcome to donate their favorite book or a collection of books. Books in all languages welcome. To donate books visit: http://openlibrary.org/bookdrive
Dr. Marc Maurer, President of the National Federation of the Blind, said: “Blind people must have access to repositories of digital information if we are to reach our goal of becoming full and equal participants in society. Access to the books that have been scanned by the Internet Archive in a format accessible to the blind will be another step toward that goal. We are excited about continuing to work with Internet Archive to make access to more books a reality.”
The 1 million+ books in the Internet Archive’s library for print disabled, are scanned from hard copy books then digitized into DAISY — a specialized format used by blind or other persons with disabilities, for easy navigation. Files are downloaded to devices that translate the text and read the books aloud for the user to enjoy. To access books visit: http://openlibrary.org/subjects/accessible_book
How an Audience-Distributed Film Won Big: talk at WordCamp SF
Update — slides available: ODP PDF
I gave a talk at WordCamp San Francisco this Saturday, May 1st: Bodysurfing the Blogosphere: How an Audience-Distributed Film Won Big. It's an in-depth look at how audience distribution worked for Nina Paley's freely-licensed film "Sita Sings the Blues". The talk was live-streamed, and we expect to have the downloadable video in a few days; we'll post it when it's available.
Think of this talk as the story behind the numbers, with a big nod to the disintermediation technologies (including WordPress, which I've had running my personal blog for years) that made it possible for a filmmaker's audience to become both her primary distributor and her primary source of income; the film also has commercial distributors, and I talked about that too.
Speaking of the blogosphere:
Our Artist-in-Residence, Nina Paley, has written a terrific post on her blog about why she stuck to her guns (er, or her USB sticks) and told Netflix no on DRM. She explained that they were welcome to offer her film Sita Sings the Blues on their streaming service only if they could offer it without Digital Restrictions Management that would interfere with viewers' ability to see, save, and share the film. Netflix wouldn't take off the DRM, and although Nina, as the licenseholder, could have granted them an exception, she chose not to, despite the considerable potential loss to her in viewers and in money.
She's gotten a lot of comments on her decision, with some people saying they didn't understand her objection to DRM on a streaming service. So she wrote a followup post What's wrong with "streaming" DRM? that explains the issue so clearly that we'll probably be appropriating it for this site at some point :-).
Enjoy both posts, and remember: one way to support her decision is to donate to the Sita Distribution Project. We've seen a spike in donations since she made her decision public, and that's a great feeling.
The Cobbler: A New Career Model for Artists and Entertainers
A media professional with several years of experience in distribution and production, Laure Parsons is a consultant and filmmaker specializing in new approaches and technologies. Most recently Director of Home Media Sale and Marketing at Zeitgeist Films, she has worked for National Film Board of Canada, New Yorker Films and Tribeca Film Festival. She can be found at xplusxfilms.com and infinicine.com.
In the past, high production and distribution costs have forced artists into a kind of gambling mentality. In order to reach audiences, artists had to rely on production companies and distributors, who in turn had to take a large percentage of revenues to cover the high costs associated with producing a film, making a run of books, or releasing an album.
Because distributors spread their risk across many different works, betting that a few will "make it big", artists too were led to a lottery attitude: your work either won big or not at all. If a work had the fortune to make it big, it could sometimes make money for the artist despite many middlemen taking their pieces — but if it did not, the artist was unlikely to make much money at all.
