Comments on: Gootube We Hardly Knew Ye http://www.ratdiary.com/2007/03/16/gootube-we-hardly-knew-ye/ Homo homini rodentius est Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:20:21 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Marc http://www.ratdiary.com/2007/03/16/gootube-we-hardly-knew-ye/#comment-2447 Marc Thu, 29 Mar 2007 21:06:54 +0000 http://www.ratdiary.com/?p=113#comment-2447 I disagree. This is a fight for control. It's easy to pass a law stating users cannot invoke a brand name, a product, or service without their respective owner's permission. Let alone add, subtract or generally fuse the content with something else for the sake of communication. The internet is humanizing companies. Leveraging content and knowledge, if even on a superficial level, and the companies don't want that. In-fact, that's exactly why we have corrupt newspaper journalists, fake news and paid-for-content ( sponsored ). With stipulation of intent laws, we'll have to refer to Nike as "The Big Shoe Company," hyper-linked to some list that indiscriminately shows ( based on earnings ) who is currently the "Big One." And, one could logically argue that since a user has experienced content, the result of that experience is now their ( the user's ) intellectual property. One could easily establish that the end result of this experience is art. Or an art-form. Users are reiterating their experiences, for good or bad, with or without financial gain. I know it sounds estranged, but it's plausible. And that is exactly what users are doing. Just a thought. :) I disagree. This is a fight for control. It’s easy to pass a law stating users cannot invoke a brand name, a product, or service without their respective owner’s permission. Let alone add, subtract or generally fuse the content with something else for the sake of communication. The internet is humanizing companies. Leveraging content and knowledge, if even on a superficial level, and the companies don’t want that.

In-fact, that’s exactly why we have corrupt newspaper journalists, fake news and paid-for-content ( sponsored ).

With stipulation of intent laws, we’ll have to refer to Nike as “The Big Shoe Company,” hyper-linked to some list that indiscriminately shows ( based on earnings ) who is currently the “Big One.”

And, one could logically argue that since a user has experienced content, the result of that experience is now their ( the user’s ) intellectual property. One could easily establish that the end result of this experience is art. Or an art-form. Users are reiterating their experiences, for good or bad, with or without financial gain.

I know it sounds estranged, but it’s plausible. And that is exactly what users are doing.

Just a thought. :)

]]> By: Sprague D http://www.ratdiary.com/2007/03/16/gootube-we-hardly-knew-ye/#comment-2434 Sprague D Sun, 25 Mar 2007 17:40:35 +0000 http://www.ratdiary.com/?p=113#comment-2434 Marc, If by "pay to play" you mean users paying a fee directly to rights-holders, you're probably right. But there are many other ways for content owners to be compensated. I don't think there has been a sea-change in rules of fair play -- it's just taken a while for the courts to catch up with the meteoric development of the internet and react to some of the more egregious abuses of copyright. The Viacom-Google suit will help bring clarity. Marc,

If by “pay to play” you mean users paying a fee directly to rights-holders, you’re probably right. But there are many other ways for content owners to be compensated. I don’t think there has been a sea-change in rules of fair play — it’s just taken a while for the courts to catch up with the meteoric development of the internet and react to some of the more egregious abuses of copyright.

The Viacom-Google suit will help bring clarity.

]]> By: Marc http://www.ratdiary.com/2007/03/16/gootube-we-hardly-knew-ye/#comment-2433 Marc Sun, 25 Mar 2007 16:38:14 +0000 http://www.ratdiary.com/?p=113#comment-2433 1) Adobe will start charging royalties for using photoshop to create artwork. 2) Programmers are going to sue for using the intrawebpipes. 3) Crayola want's a cut from those pictures I did when I was five....I made first place in the local fair and received a free roller-skating pass for the weekend. The debate is Creativity vs. Context. People are paid for context not content ( the end result ). The pay to play model died a while ago. 1) Adobe will start charging royalties for using photoshop to create artwork.

2) Programmers are going to sue for using the intrawebpipes.

3) Crayola want’s a cut from those pictures I did when I was five….I made first place in the local fair and received a free roller-skating pass for the weekend.

The debate is Creativity vs. Context. People are paid for context not content ( the end result ). The pay to play model died a while ago.

]]>