overview of the current spectrum of offerings for digital media producers each has critical ideological dimensions each has consequences for... copyright has historically evolved in the interests of commercial intermediaries (publishers, broadcasters, media companies). it is not an inevitable regime for governing the circulation of texts and media. if we shift the unit of analysis to “circulation of ideas” (rather than “ownership” of ideas) then the way we approach the accessibility of our works privileges public communication, knowledge over commerce. this is an ideological choice and a political act.
http://www2.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/opinion/story.html?id=3422a65e-6b34-4b41-b9fe-8308b9775e4b Jean to do more on this
walk through the process of creating a license is this a stopover for the workshop use examples before we run through the terrain
http://www.gnu.org/bulletins/bull5.html The copyleft movement emerged out of the free/open source software movement and continues as a complimentary but distinct movement, also embracing social currents such as free culture and creative commons. The idea of copyleft originated with Richard Stallman (1996), who sought a “general method for making a program or other work free, and requiring all modified and extended versions of the program to be free as well” (What is copyleft?). Copyleft utilizes copyright law to eliminate restrictions on distributing copies and modified versions of a work. In other words, it uses private rights to create public goods. The original copyleft license, the GNU General Public License (GPL), was released in 1989 and was designed specifically for software. It was more than a decade before the concept was adapted, through the Creative Commons project, for works traditionally protected by copyright law, such as books, plays, movies, music, articles, photographs, blogs and websites. A copyleft licensing scheme enshrines the four freedoms of the free software movement: the freedom to run, modify, copy and redistribute a work. Where copyright regimes increasingly seek to restrict access and constrain use of original works, copyleft contests the notion that intellectual property can be commoditized, bought and sold like any other good in the capitalist economy. In this way, copyleft issues a fundamental challenge to capitalism, particularly with the rhetoric of the Information Age framing the debate.Copyleft dovetails practically and philosophically with tech activism. Not only do tech activists develop free software, which by its very nature is copyleft, they premise their social movement objectives upon its founding principle - that information should be free. Implicit in this notion is a radical critique of capitalist society that attempts to privatize everything, from fundamentals like the DNA that comprises human beings, to essentials like the water that sustains us, to intangibles like the information that empowers us. Copyleft aids and informs processes of open knowledge production, which generates information outside the bounds of capitalism, enabling it to circulate freely based on public need and interest. This is a self-conscious practice that has historical and theoretical roots in the technical development of the computer, and computer networking, as discussed above. Open knowledge production, or the unihibited circulation of information, is a critical component of the global justice work in which tech activists engage. It is a founding premise of Indymedia, which challenges the journalistic objectivity and gatekeeping of corporate mainstream media through its open publishing software and . Open knowledge production is fostered by the use of social software, such as wikis, used to facilitate many open source and tech activist projects.As this lineage show, tech activism is a social current that arose out of multiple and overlapping social movements. As complementary and intersecting social movements, the free software, global justice and copyleft movements have provided rich and mutually supportive environs for tech activists, who both produced and were produced by technological advances in computing and computer networking. As part of a global movement contesting the transnational rule of capitalism and armed with a belief in the liberating potential of technology, these geeks contribute to progressive social change in two ways. The first is by reconstructing the Internet “from organizational business tool and communication medium [to] a lever of social transformation” (Castells, 2001, p. 143). Indeed, Kahn and Kellner (2004) argue that the use of the Internet by the global justice movement has corresponded to a radical transformation of the Internet into a more participatory and democratic medium, what Feenberg and Bakardjieva (2004) call the community model of the Internet. Secondly, tech activists prefigure progressive change offline by constructing alternative technical systems that challenge the dominant mode of social organization and promote democratic communication. These systems use exclusively free software and have the explicit goal of creating a freer society. They are based on social values of trust, equality, mutual aid, volunteerism, and cooperation, and on organizational values of autonomy, decentralization and collaboration. The subversive use of new technology to undermine the existing social hierarchy suggests the possibility of organizing society in ways that enhance democracy, rather than capitalist efficiency and control. Through my various case studies, I hope to show how the democratic development, use and control of software enables a different Internet and, broadly considered, a different world.
http://eng.anarchopedia.org/An_Anarchist_FAQ_-_What_is_Cultural_Anarchism%3F David Weir, Anarchy and Culture: http://books.google.ca/books?id=fRR8eWzRhbYC&dq=David+Weir+Anarchy+and+Culture&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=SjWfSaPNB4KUsQPU05zKCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result#PPA11,M1 SHOW examples from surrealism and situationism dadaism not surrealism. John Hartfield.
Copyrights And Wrongs Nov5 2009
COPYRIGHTS AND WRONGS?
CITIZENSHIP, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & USING THE CREATIVE COMMONS
Image credit: englishsnow [CC-BY-SA], http://www.ﬂickr.com/photos/tylerburrus/3662141080/
WHY TALK ABOUT THIS?
Know The Cultural Context Of Copyright/left
Know The History
Find Where You Are In All Of It
AUTO-TUNE THE NEWS
group of friends utilizing legally obtained news footage to
produce satirical take on US news
everyday practice of youtube - remixing or answering other
This practice has long historical precedent
what's new about it is the scale of distribution/participation and
the form of disembodiment/alienation in that participation
Video credit: The Gregory Brothers [CC-PD], http://www.youtube.com/user/schmoyoho#p/a/u/0/LnoD3NUux3M
THE GREY ALBUM
this vid represents technologies bringing people together
(dialectical w/alienating practice)
Jay-Z made his tracks freely available, Beatles did not. Beatles
are one of the worst examples of the excesses of locking down
music. (outside the law; cultural critique)
commentary on race, hiphop, sampling/remixing
sampling/remixing as done by the Beatles - like Disney, they
draw from the cultural commons, but don't give much back
Video credit: DJ Dangermouse [CC-PD], http://waxy.org/random/video/grey_video.mov . However, reproduce at
your own peril, as portions of this video may violate prior rights of sampled work of other rightsholders.
GIMME THE MERMAID
Negativland - band/pirate radio phreaks, started in the 1980s,
culture-jammers (a term they invented) : re-use of media as a
direct cultural critique (of capitalism, copyright, etc)
their critique is embodied in their practice - as with the Little
Mermaid, where calls from a Disney lawyer are integrated into
the composition along with images from the ﬁlm. another rich
commentary on the problems (and gendering) of copyright and
Video credit: Negativland [CC-PD?], http://www.illegal-art.org/video/popups/gimme.html . However, reproduce
at your own peril, as portions of this video may violate prior rights of sampled work of other rightsholders.
originally a perpetual, exclusive right
the Statute of Anne limited this right to 14 years from the date of a work's
Scottish booksellers argued that the Statute did not extinguish the perpetual
rights in common law.
In 1774, the House of Lords rejected this argument, afﬁrming copyright’s
limited term (14 years) to preserve a public domain (repository of cultural
history) (Lessig 2004:93).
In 1790 a similar law was adopted in the Unites States. Canada's ﬁrst
Copyright Act came much later, in 1921.
The 19th Century saw the evolution of copyright law generally
in step with industrialization
enshrining of mechanical processes in international copyright
law: The Berne Convention of 1886 rights as being "ﬁxed" in
some physical medium, rather than in the works themselves.
growth of royalty collection societies during this period marked
the separation of the idea of the work from a ﬁxed medium
(mechanical vs performance rights)
broadcast media demanded new models for remuneration for
creators and creative businesses (to pay performance royalties,
they required advertising $)
new (re)production tech (movie studios, broadcast
infrastructure) increasingly designed to preclude mass
participation in culture
20TH CENTURY - 2ND HALF
growth in advertising, proﬁt motivations for cultural creation
Beginning in 1962, the call for an extension in the term of
copyright began (since extended 11 times)
Meanwhile - growing demand for consumer-grade recording
technologies, such as analog tape, 16 and 8 mm camera (and
later video) formats - disruptive of elite modes of creation
successful lobbying by groups representing media corporations
has curtailed our right to legally participate in our culture
DMCA (1998) - the rights to modify the very technologies we
use to listen, watch, or read media are prohibited by law
current Copyright ‘reform’ in Canada - hotly politicized
but digital media threaten the corporate media regime more
than prior tech (open code, componentization of computer
fair use in the US/fair dealing in Canada - differences:
no category for parody in Canada
covers “research and private study” in Canada (& generally int he
U.S. too) - must meet certain criteria
under siege by Bill C61/other copyright ‘reform’ initiatives
historical relationship of anarchist politics and avant gardism
from Surrealism to Situationism to Sampling to Negativland,
the breaking of dominant institutional codes of intellectual
property isn’t anything new, and isn’t going away any time
Image credit: Aurelio A. Heckert [FAL 1.3], http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en