The C-Span copyright issue was one I had meant to blog about, but missed the window of opportunity. Thankfully, C-Span has opened their window of allowable use of their expression to include attributed, non-commercial use on the web. This will likely take care of most of the demand for use, but I’m wondering if there are still a few cases where it may not go far enough. Fair use might protect the example of a corporation who wants to post a legislator’s speech for purposes of criticism, but it would not shield them from the threat of a lawsuit.
In my view, a few static cameras and creative software/server tricks could meet the demand for copyright-free governmental material, while still leaving space for C-Span to make quality government television. This could be done at little taxpayer expense and would go far to shed more sunlight on how government works. The problem: image conscious public servants would never go for the idea (on the chance that they might get caught taking a nap or rolling their eyes).
Nevertheless, as Lessig said, “More of course would be better. But first steps are progress [towards openness], and deserve sincere praise.”
Links
- Lessig: On being big and being great: C-Span
- Washington Post: C-SPAN Alters Copyright Over Pelosi Flap
- NY Times: In Policy Shift, C-Span Clears Some Clips for Web Use
- Addition – The C-Span press release, which flat out states: “The new C-SPAN policy borrows from the approach to copyright known in the online community as ‘Creative Commons.'” Neato.