Morning things

I have to go get ready for things, but I wanted to do a quick post.

1) Snappy retort to JK Rowling who is suing someone over his writing of a Harry Potter reference book, entitled, "Harry Potter Lexicon." It includes perhaps the funniest line I've read in a while: "JK... Can I call you JK?" Ok, maybe it's not that funny, but I enjoyed it nonetheless.

http://machinist.salon.com/blog/2007/11/13/harry_potter/

2) This is SO AWESOME. A group called "One Laptop Per Child" has manufactured small, cheap laptops (with free - meaning open - coding) to be distributed en masse to the children of the third world. Only until November 26th, you can buy one for yourself to see how neat they are (and how cheap) - under the condition that you buy one for a child who needs it.

http://www.laptopgiving.org/en/index.php

Correlation

According to a study done in Canada, there is a positive correlation between the amount of P2P sharing done by a person (Canadian, anyway) and the amount of CDs that that person buys. This is according to:

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/2347/125/

In my opinion, this is an exceptionally important find, the results of which strike a firm blow against the music industry. This proves that FREE p2p sharing can actually have a POSITIVE influence on a revenue-driven market, thus serving to legitimize p2p as something good. It proves a level of responsibility on the part of consumers.

In short, it means that free is not necessarily bad. It's a good thing to look further into as a possible solution to end the Piracy War.

RIAA/IC Update

The meeting last night was quite different from what I'd expected.

I went in there expecting carnage, expecting to tear someone apart, but the three people who led the meeting were informative, helpful, kind, and more knowledgeable than I expected them to be.

They provided students with resources across the board... from free music alternatives to links to EFF and Creative Commons... also, it turns out that they did NOT divulge ANY personal information to the RIAA. What had happened was that Apogee, their ISP, received a series of pre-litigation letters. These letters were NOT DMCA COMPLIANT and, therefore, based on Apogee policy, were sent back undelivered. However, the college received copies of all paperwork regarding it as a part of its deal with Apogee. So, when the college received the pre-litigation letters, they held a long debate that culminated in them deciding it was their moral obligation to pass these letters on to the identified students (bearing in mind that all this time, all the RIAA has ever known is those students' IP addresses), as a means of making them aware that they were being legally targeted.

It is both the college's and Apogee's policies to divulge no personal information unless issued a proper, legal subpoena, which they have not as of yet been issued at all with regard to this matter.

In My Opinion, the college did a pretty good job handling things overall. The one thing I think they failed at was EDUCATION. They said that a few years ago the RIAA came to all colleges to discuss what could be done about the mass copyright infringement. They came to the agreement that colleges would set their judicial policies about it, and they would provide education. However, that never really happened.

So last night I, and others, strongly suggested a new wave of education where they not only inform students of copyright law and how to deal with this current RIAA matter, but also discuss the future of copyright law and perhaps how to change it.

The RIAA and Ithaca College

Recently the RIAA included Ithaca College students in its target group of college students to attack for copyright infringement. These fascists tried to collect money in "reparations" or really whatever you care to call them, from IC students and college students across the country. It is, of course, totally deplorable. The RIAA has been arguing that it is important for college campuses to cooperate, because it is important for them to instill the value and importance of copyright and its laws in youth in order for them to be able to interact properly with the world around them. What they are really trying to say is that it is important for us to stifle youth so that they will be properly tempered to be docile consumers and people who don't question either their government or other social systems. What they are really trying to say is, "Hey, we're trying to make some fucking money over here."

Bullshit, In My Opinion.

According to people with whom I've spoken, Apogee was contacted and "required" to deliver the names associated with IPs on the Ithaca College grid, and they denied the RIAA's request which is EXACTLY what they should have done. The RIAA does not have the right to go around policing the country and attacking people, ESPECIALLY (but not limited to) those with limited financial means, such as college students. Depraved!!!

However, Ithaca College has passed on the RIAA pre-litigation letters to the students cited, who now feel OBLIGATED to simply pay the FUCKING RIAA $3,000 dollars to prevent a lawsuit. Is this what we've come to? Just give me a boatload of money and I won't sue you. That's a great fucking message to pass on to the youth, guys.

Today at 7pm in Textor 101 there will be a meeting held by ITS and Judicial and Legal Affairs in something of a town council-style meeting.

IF YOU GO TO ITHACA COLLEGE, please forward that information to EVERYONE YOU KNOW who is concerned about copyright law, or who downloads music, or is angry about what the RIAA has been doing. Please go to this meeting and tell them that you firmly believe they must not reveal the names of their students! They must not bow to the BULLYING PRESSURE of the RIAA. It is their moral obligation to PROTECT the student body. Tell them to pursue actively educating students in not copyright law, but copyLEFT law and things like Creative Commons Licensing.

Links: EFF, Creative Commons

Copyright and YouTube

I have to wonder what the point is at this point...

I'm trying to watch clips of The Arcade Fire from Saturday Night Live a little while back because, well, I don't have a television so I couldn't watch it when it aired. But the clips on YouTube have been taken down, undoubtedly because someone who owns SNL sent a takedown notice to YouTube... and this is where I have to wonder what the point of it all is... this is a clip of a live performance, which is not for sale or anything, not ACCESSIBLE AT ALL. Because of this, there is nothing to be GAINED from holding back the clip from the public. I will admit that there might be nothing to be gained from allowing the clip to stand (although, perhaps it would make people inclined to watch SNL more if they enjoyed the fact that this band was on it and did such a good job!), however there is nothing to LOSE either because they're not trying to make a profit from this particular video.

In other words, they're just sitting on this video for no good reason. They are LOSING the faith of people by holding onto the clip because people like me will be frustrated that they're being pack-rat Nazis instead of sharing what they have with people who really care to take part in it.

It's at the point that copyright is no longer really a matter of protecting one's vested interest. It is a corporate bandwagon that no company seems to be able to see is actually bringing down the ship. Rather than censoring the bits and pieces of their "owned" videos (let's face it. Nobody owns images. Intellectual Property is an illusion), they should be sharing the wealth and worrying about their bottom line, and how they might be able to use this new technology to their advantage.

In My Opinion, by demanding the removal of the videos of The Arcade Fire's performance, Saturday Night Live (or whomever it's parent company is... Viacom?) is being impractical and childish.