I am stuck in between two creative commons, attribution non no derivatives and attribution-share alike. I believe the in my own personal work, such as my blog or a personal Web site such as my facebook account, that other people should not be allowed to alter or modify it. If I want comments or corrections the inquiring people can leave a message on my wall, or post a comment. If I were to write a blog and it generated enough “buzz” that someone wanted to copy and distribute it, I would be fine with that. However, I would want to know. On the flip side, I understand how problems occurred with music artists, during the Napster era. I would allow Public license on my work because it is not my main source of income. But, for break through artists, their managers and operations teams, selling albums is one of the first origins of profit.
On the flip side, if I was the ultimate creator of Wikipedia, I believe in the attribution- share alike creative commons. If I were to create a body of work that would be, in essence, an endless abyss of information for millions of people, I would not want that on my shoulders. It is impossible for one person to be the expert on everything. By allowing other people to edit and add to my work, it is opening up many doors. I may be an expert on styles of dance and Italian food; I am not an expert on chemistry. Therefore, someone can add to my work on that subject.
I disagree with Barlow’s declaration. Our legal concepts of property, expression, identify and movement is in fact based on matter. There is a difference between my physical home and my homepage, but not that much. I show just as much expression and movement through an article I have written on the internet as would through a painted I created. The declaration is based on a physical means, however in the current era we are moving toward the internet being the main focal point of expression and work. No longer do we have paper documents, we have documents via computer. Our world is changing to a Web based system and declarations and laws will adapt to the current state of being.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Jennie: I sympathize. These are hard decisions. You've got certain kind of online interactions - writing on facebook, etc. - that you would not want altered. These are tied to you personally. Wikipedia you see as more a general project of knowledge and exchange. Is there a point where these meet? I wonder about the person who composes a wikipedia article only to have it totally changed. There must be some sense of authorial loss... Interesting reaction to Barlow: I think you're right that the online can be physical in its own way. Lessig talks about "cyberspace" as this immersive and physical relation to the net.
Post a Comment