Good to know. Thanks!
F
On Jul 25, 2008, at 1:31 PM, Christian Curtis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
For the record, I object to the right of publicity.
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 12:07 PM, Fred Benenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 11:51 AM, Dean Jansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
People who slap NC on their CC'd work on the other hand have the
very sound understanding that if they didn't do this, nasty, greedy
corporations could make colossal profits by selling access, or
performances, copies, and derivatives of their work (despite it
being freely copyable).
I fully understand why NC exists, but in this case I think it's
completely idiotic. I mean if some horrible greedy corporation wants
to make colossal profits by selling access to the Spark competition
video website and videos, then by all means LET THEM!
If you're trying to sell something in the first place and think
you're going to be edged out of the market by large corporations,
then NC *might* make sense.
--Dean
I agree for the most part here.
But I think there is another reason that is grounded in pure capital-
self-interest for creators choosing NC. I think its because people
don't like the idea of a corporation using their work for
advertising or promotion. Its not that think they're losing out on a
possible revenue stream, its that they think of themselves as
artists who have a right to say who gets to use their work
commercially or not. This is the case for publicity rights to ones
image (and I don't think that many people object to publicity
rights.) so it seems a natural extension for artists to assume such
a right to their images or work.
People have strong objections to commercialization of community
projects (see: Wikipedia and advertising or the prohibition of
logos / cash / corporations at Burning Man among many examples) and
while I personally as an artist find the "freedom from restrictions"
argument compelling in the face of the absurdity of copyright
monopolies, most people don't get that far -- they hear that Ford
can, legally, use their music in a Commercial or Exxon can, legally,
use their photo on their website, and they slap NC on it.
Changing attitudes on NC is not going to be done by focusing on
hypothetical royalties or commissions (or by sarcastically
antagonizing people about ones that won't exist), but by changing
attitudes about corporations and commercial uses of creative works.
That is a long battle that predates CC and copyleft.
Assuming that the argument just comes down to a "lost revenue" issue
assumes that all artists who use NC are exclusively capitally
motivated, which is a cynical and, from my experience, fairly
shallow view of their relationship to their work.
And on one last note -- I don't buy the argument that "copyleft"
solves the exploitation by a corporation problem because
corporations don't like "viral" licenses. This implies that though
corporations CAN do something, we just assume they WON'T do it
because of some generalized assumption about corporations not liking
copyleft, which may not hold true -- which should not hold true.
F
PS: Despite working for CC, these views are mine and mine alone.
From: Dean Jansen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 25 July 2008 4:13pm
To: Discussion of Free Culture in general and this organization in
particular
Subject: Re: [FC-discuss] Sparky Awards video contest
I assume he means this:
"Copyright, 2008 SPARC, subject to a Creative Commons Attribution-
NonCommercial 2.5 License"
and that NC = lame (especially in this case)
That's just my interpretation of the comment though, so who knows.
--Dean
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 11:10 AM, Nelson Pavlosky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
Rob Myers wrote:
> Rather than comment on the NC failage in this competition I'll just
> draw your attention to:
>
> http://youtube.com/watch?v=iVCGmyRrmUc
>
> - Rob.
What does "NC failage" mean?
~Nelson~
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
