Message 08334 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxdeT08323 Message: 3/20 L2 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: [ox] Wem nuetzt das Urheberrecht? u.a.



Karl Dietz writes:

dazu eine konkrete frage: wenn nun ein autor seine texte nicht per 
copyleft im netz stehen haben möchte. was dann?

schwierige Frage.....
ich schrieb gerade an die Minciu sodas Liste

I am just meditating over the question of art and copyright. A friend of
mine has made a film on a beachvolleyball event, all in the copyright
scene, with orderly quoted songs and the dues paid.

So I wondered how he could have achieved that in a creative commons
environment. I wanted to provoque him with the question what about
copyleft.

Several thoughts came up that I want to share:

Coypleft in Art is rather a question of modification than improvement.
That was, as much as I understood, Andrius' point that software wants to
cluster, "something else" (*) not.

 (*) I am very careful about saying "content" here, because I think it is
way to general. Lets talk about the opposite case of the one mentioned
above. When I read the book "a pattern language" by Christopher Alexander
that Andrius gave me, I found out that is content that wants to cluster.
Patterns form a continuum and explain each other. The author himself works
on a very general level and considers some of his own findings valuable,
some less. He has even given hints in his work where and how he expects
improvements. That is what Andrius has outlined (see below!) as the
"commons" case.

Now lets return to my friend and his beachvolleyball video which is more
the "individuals" case. He has copyrighted it because he sees no need for
improvement. It is a singular work. There is a mechanism for taking
content out and qouting it and maybe paying fees, but it becomes
increasingly painstaking to do so. With digital media and the exchange of
samples improving, digital creativity could lead to a more and more
elaborated meshwork of filaments of content. (this argument is on the base
of my general remarks about "digital creativity" here:
http://www.bookandsurf.at/html/digital_creativity.html)

Now the main question is this: can we create a "work" and protect it
against plagiarism for the time being and yet allow the elements of
content that form new filaments of meaning to be free and autonomous, to
be thrown in the cooking pot that we all use together? I do not see that
the Creative Commons have provided for that case, but it would deserve
closer attention. Maybe I am wrong; anyway:  I see Andrius point as very
valuable because he wants to build a bridge between the copyleft and the
copyright world, without favoring the "media feudalist" approach of
capitalizing on the posession of socalled Intellectual property.

This opens a way to include many artists who nowadays even as cultural
creatives would have enormous difficulties to open up to the Open Source
movement. And its a shame to see them on the wrong side of the barricade.

Just a few thoughts.....

Franz


minciu_sodas_en yahoogroups.com (Andrius Kulikauskas) writes:
At heart, the question is, When we work together, are we thinking of
ourselves as a "set of individuals", or as a "commons"?  Let us consider
the two extremes.

If, as an author, I think of myself as one individual among many,
then my work which I share is my finished "product".  My wishes will be
definitive.  I will be held accountable for my content.  I will fix the
boundaries of my work.  I will share with those who share as I do.  If
my work has any value, then I will require compensation. The law will
protect my rights as an individual, as affirmed by Copyright.

Alternatively, as an author, I may think of myself as a participant of
the commons. I share my "work-in-progress" so that I might involve
others.  My wishes defer to the commons, except where my content states
clearly otherwise.  I am not held accountable for my work, and I do not
insist on attribution.  My work has no set boundaries, and is
modifiable.  My work is for all, for those of every culture, not only
those who share as I do.  I give without expecting anything in return.
Morality protects my work, and I declare it Public Domain.


________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.de/
Organisation: projekt oekonux.de



[English translation]
Thread: oxdeT08323 Message: 3/20 L2 [In index]
Message 08334 [Homepage] [Navigation]