Thanks Dave,

If I slacked anymore, I'd be totally horizontal. :-)
The problem isn't money, it is the legal contracts associated with trying to 
protect created works for use worldwide through the internet, and the 
derivatives.
Personally I would like to see a brand new approach, one that truly protects 
the rights of the creator against the interests of "big business", as well as 
this new market. It should be so "simple", especially when the words culture, 
BBC, and Rights are used within the Backstage list, repeatedly. 
I'm saddened that the technical and innovational advantage that the BBC had in 
decades gone by, is now perhaps being lost, under the guise of political and 
social correctness..... when equally we are all becoming more and more aware 
that the BBC is no longer a single entity, but more a collection of private 
interest's contracted to work together. :-) This is slowly being extended.
Yes, there are parts of the content of the BBC that do belong to the culture 
and fabric of British society...... but if the archive represents the real 
model of what is happening now, then we are all going to lose out. I hope that 
some there are actually debating the future, and whether the return to 
important culture is something that is worth not only protecting, but 
protecting for society .... to represent this time as a stamp for the world. 
Legally. :-) 
The BBC should be perfectly placed to promote a new ideal, a new contract 
between creators and the world of the internet.... not simply for the UK, or 
for no financial reward. They themselves fund creations, and therefore have 
exactly the same potential problems..... as well as an incredible opportunity 
ahead. 
The connected parts of this debate are amazingly complex, but I have yet to 
find anyone in the UK who is able to see the internet of 2012 as more open than 
1993. Business in the artistic world seems to want to close it all down in to 
country states. Those borders should not be so problematic by now. Art doesn't 
respect them.
The Bealtles, and British music in general, would have been pretty sad if the 
guys hadn't "borrowed" from the US Blues and African rhythms.....the 
BBC/UKCentric model of the world wide web does not allow for this innovation to 
happen freely. I remember time shifting the news on the BBC site back in 
1997...... over 10 years ago, and how far have we come? In 12 years I know that 
there is much that is different in the coding, but very little that has been 
truly innovative enough to change the BBC's contribution to society as a whole.
That is not to bash anyone....... radio hasn't changed in essence, nor has TV, 
but for tinkering to some features and obvious technical advances.
I love the net, and I have surfed it since 1989...... it has changed, and is 
changing as I write. Everyone now has a library of information...... their own 
as well as the worlds. The structure of business within the net doesn't have to 
be the same as the real world..... can you imagine the Rolling Stones saying 
that they were only going to play in the UK? Absurd. Same with Hollywood and 
Cinema.
This is only a brief introduction...... I'll happily contribute more if anyone 
wishes. But briefly, if I pay UK tax, a UK license fee, have a UK home, a UK 
passport with Europe on it...... why do I still lose the use of iPlayer just 
because I am overseas? Others have solved this problem without cutting off 
their "customers" or audience, but I understand it cannot be done if one 
follows the rules of the real world.... but meanwhile those who do it illegally 
tend to get most of what they wish for. Should we all have another slice of 
cultural anarchy? Google in bondage. :-)
Regards
Rich


On Saturday, May 17, 2008, at 07:22PM, "Dave Crossland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>2008/5/8 Richard P Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> I am still not certain about Dave Crossland's model either....
>
>As kind as it is to be attributed with the http://freedomdefined.org
>model of culture that I advocate, may I suggest you call it the
>"culture freedom" model or similar :-)
>
>> as a result it is very frustrating to try to professionally consider why I 
>> should
>> work so hard when the rules of distribution are clearly so uncertain at
>> present
>
>May I suggest you work hard because you love what you do, and if its
>just about the money, slack off a bit :-)
>
>-- 
>Regards,
>Dave
>Personal opinion only :-)
>-
>Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
>visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
>Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
>
>
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Reply via email to