Category: Media / Sociology

In Defense of Piracy indeed

Larry Lessig writes preview of his new book in a Wall Street Journal column this weekend. Lessig makes some bold and compelling statements for one who is working less in the realm of copyright. Many of his arguments are actually near to the work I am doing on my dissertation–it’s nice to be in good company 🙂

A few points are worth further comment:

“We could craft copyright law to encourage a wide range of both professional and amateur creativity, without threatening Prince’s profits.” …I like this argument for a balance in the law where professional creative-types are still able to profit, while still loosening control for equally valuable amateur copying.

“Peer-to-peer file sharing is the enemy in the “copyright wars.” Kids “stealing” stuff with a computer is the target. The war is not about new forms of creativity, not about artists making new art.” …another great distinction between replacement copying (which carries an economic harm) and profitless but creative amateur creativity.

“Our kids live in an age of prohibition, where more and more of what seems to them to be ordinary behavior is against the law. They recognize it as against the law. They see themselves as “criminals. … That recognition is corrosive. It is corrupting of the very idea of the rule of law” …it’s not in the article, but gobs of theory and research can back up Lessig’s claim here.

I’m not sure if Lessig was responsible, but the sidebar with mash-y creations is also a good compilation for the unititiated.  His policy recomendations are not bad as well.  I’m looking forward to the book.

2008 RNC Journalist Arrests

It’s hard not to sound political when you’re talking about protesters at a political event and linking to admittedly partisan sources. Yet, the story of the protests at the 2008 Republican National Convention was perhaps successfully buried by the arrests of what some have called “dozens of journalists, photographers, bloggers and videomakers. I’ve watched Twin Cities IndyMedia LiveWire and it seemed like every time I looked, there was another (unsubstantiated) report of journalists being arrested or gassed. We afford journalists legal protection because of the important role they play in keeping government transparent and accountable to the public. Every journalism school I’ve been at has said it’s tough work, and this shows it.

A good friend once said that he couldn’t see how nonviolent protest could fail to cure a social ill. I’ve always been a little skeptical of this view, largely because of its reliance on media to show what happens to protesters. But it’s surprising how YouTube and Twitter might hold some hope for this view–even though they’re only getting the message out to people who are interested.

Here’s a playlist of a few journalist arrest videos.

Why privacy and copyright make small providers nervous

Another response to my assertion that FERPA has some scared tells me deserves a bit of clarification.

The trouble (and in some respects, benefit) of laws like copyright and privacy, which only become certain after long and expensive litigation, is that they are not completely explicit. Borderline cases leave small providers wondering whether they might be liable if they were sued–and this uncertainty leads some to steer clear of anything that pushes the boundaries.

My own theory is that FERPA was written in a protectionist paradigm, rather than a control paradigm. This means that certain categories of data are completely locked down, rather than giving the student or instructor the options to contol the data how they see fit. With fine-grained facebook-like privacy controls, it should be technically possible to let students control what is publicly released (indeed many do it anyway by doing things like posting a course video project to YouTube). The nervousness creates a situation where law (rightly or even by misinterpretation) limits what people might do with technology.

Trusting Kill Switches and Manners

Wired warns us about the future, kill switches, and Digital Manners Policies arguing, “Once we go down this path — giving one device authority over other devices — the security problems start piling up.”

I tend to agree. When the person behind the wheel loses complete control they are put in a position where someone else might abuse these new controls. As a tinker-er I’d also feel any managed devices I owned had been crippled.

However, the security problem I also worry about is the potential for a false sense of security. It may sound convenient to have phones muted in theatres, but there are contexts where this could be dangerous (a doctor might not realize the restriction and miss an important call). Certainly someone will think that, since OnStar can turn off their car if it were stolen, they can leave the doors unlocked and the keys on the dash.

Trusting technology is fine–but there might come a point where this trust could make us less aware of our surroundings.