9 posts tagged “blog”
I respect and admire both the individuals named here; I'm not a lawyer or biologist.
I did however leave a comment disagreeing with PZ on Lessig's defense of the Fair Use (of Lennon's "Imagine") claim made by the makers of "Expelled."
I had mixed feelings about Yoko Ono's lawsuit against Expelled — fair use is a desirable goal, but I don't think Premise Media was exercising fair use, since their movie wasn't about Lennon's music or ideas — so I can't say that I'm at all surprised or upset that the lawsuit is likely to go down in flames. I'm also not appreciative of the fact that Lessig thinks this is a "great success"; it is at best a mixed result, because while it may support Lessig's principled defense of fair use, it is also a case where he's supporting people who are promoting lies and ignorance.
It really doesn't matter much now, though. The propaganda movie is a dead issue, a complete flop, and it is not going to come back from the dead after a court decision that had no effect on its declining popularity is reversed.
Thank you #1 and #5, I agree, and mildly disagree with PZ.
Questions asking "is this a Fair Use" are complicated enough WITHOUT attempting to make a value judgment on the work in question.
I too would like to see Fair Use expanded, but my reason for that position is that Copyright law has in my opinion been completely corrupted and made into a vehicle for monopolies, corporations and excessive profiteering.
Were the copyright term restored to the original 15 years then we would have a lot more time to argue whether this or that is really "Fair Use." But of course, you would rarely have a survivor inheriting "rights of authorship" and attempting to "protect" something they did not create (Yoko)
Another example is the owners of the rights to "Gone With the Wind" attempting to suppress publication of "The Wind Done Gone" a re-telling of the story from the slaves' perspective. (They failed to suppress, thankfully)
So, broadly, Intellectual Property Law is so completely broken, you almost have to become a lawyer to completely grok how perverted it really is in relation to its intent.
The Mouse is In Control. Disney is Dead. Hannah Montana is Fake.
This comment is (c) copyrighted (tm) trademarked and (r) registered.
Lessig Response:
nicely put. thanks.
You're welcome!
The "This Week in Law" Program is one of the TWiT family of shows.
In Episode 14 "Blogger and Podcaster Liability" Denise and her panel of guests talk about law, risk, insurance, defamation, anonymity, "broadcasts", corporate blogging, forums, blogging policy, and more.
This episode is chock-full of information of interest to "anyone who has hosted an online conversation." That's my term for blogger, podcaster, lifestreamer, moderator, online community manager, etc. Many legal issues remain unresolved, and will find resolution every time a landmark case gets decided.
Blogging isn't going away, so it's important to familiarize oneself with the legal issues. This program does not overuse "legalese," but will help you learn terms of art such as "expectation of privacy."
One interesting issue discussed is the emergence of blogging lawyers, one in particular who was "recruited away" and caused his old law firm to embrace blogging in the interests of remaining competitive.
WTF? srsly, the spell-correction for "kerfuffel" is "motherf***er" not
"kerfuffle"... minutes ago
I think the situation is pretty Fup ... Duck ... agree! -ed.
An observation, a few assertions: and then five rules.
At issue here is not existence or prevalence or specific uses of bad words that mean bad things.
I assume here you wish to offend, surprise, shock, and do so intentionally. I also assume you know about the seven broadcast illegal words, racial epithets, "hate speech" and even speech that intends to incite a mob to do violence.
This serves as a reminder that using such speech unnecessarily and thoughtlessly will get you judged by some, filtered out by others, and labeled a Knave and a Blackguard by your local Lordship or Community Board or Homeowner's association. Is your lazy f-bomb really necessary? Are you sure it won't turn around later and bite you on the posterior?
A dire situation in U.S. law arises when one of seven unspeakables ref: wiki ref: George Carlin
are broadcast during non-late-night programming. Fines may add up to hundreds of thousands and even millions of dollars, and still may not include a broadcaster's fine.So, while we bring our shameful and Puritanical tendencies into the 21st century, remember:
- 1) Just because you can use bad language, racial epithets, expletives, does not mean you should. Supporting evidence: lack of UK or Canadian "obscenity law" as we have; lack of expletives in BBC, CBC; Lack of their desire to follow our shining example in making "sounds representing words representing offensive concepts" a soundcrime (but not a spelledwordcrime.) These are quite different from a more personal kind of offense such as defamation, slander or libel, which isn't about the language per se being offensive, but is damaging an individual or group. Scandal rags, busybodies, gossips, bloggers, character assassins, trash talkers - may exceed their right to speak freely and lose the protection of old man Bill... O'Rights.
- 2) Inability to refer to or use offensive or bad language without creating a problem for someone else implies a lack of education or imagination. "...defecate, fornicate, micturate!" (translation left as an exercise for the reader). The Irish version of "s***" - is shite which you will notice is just an S-bomb with an "e". "F-bomb" and "S-bomb" are good terms for specific expletives. "Fudge" and "Sugar" to quote my Grandmama Della.
- 3) Penis penis penis. Refer to South Park on Comedy Central. Adults skeptical of the value of this show have to wade in way past the F-bombs and S-bombs to get at some valuable ideas. Almost all medical terms for body parts are completely OK. (At least for now.... until Science is classified as offensive by puritanical clerics). If you actually find a justification to say "penis penis penis" perhaps an award is in your future. Perhaps not.
- 4) "N-word", once again, is OFF LIMITS to HONKIES who don't have STREET CRED with the AUDIENCE at the venue. Very nearly the only way to do this right is to insult all parties ad nauseum, including the speaker or author, and not just echo or establish pejorative stereotypes that can encourage racism and intolerance. Example Asian Drivers. At its most innocent it's a nonsequitur fallacy; the issue is Anyone who is a Citizen who decides or wants to Learn To Drive at an Advanced Age with optional Language Barriers. Asian rebel teens drive just as well as American rebel teens. The humor of Carlos Mencia is sacrificed on the altar he constructs to honor this error. His comedy is stereotyped, revelation-free, and his signature "deet-dee-dee" running gag is an example of the straw man fallacy. By mocking really stupid behavior and getting you to laugh at it, you both can feel like "f***ing geniuses" by comparison.
More importantly much of his (better) material is not "borrowed" but "stolen" in the worst way; this is proven by his response to the allegation Joe Rogan made on stage. One more thing: Even if you think all you have to do is engage in some quick self-stereotyping, Mr. Beaner, you're wrong. There, I said it. - 5) Acronyms "WTF" or phonetics and unspellings "s**t" are appropriate if the equivalent written or spoken form is also O.K. Watch out for phonetic forms, pity the poor radio people! Vietnamese family at health clinic with Aunt Linda, "...Mrs. Yu asked, "you want I get my son Fuk?"" Also a problem.... "gung hey phat choy phuc." Very easy to screw up.
Help preserve our Cultural Epithets and Expletives, but not the censorship laws enforced in the courts. If the epithets are lost, or devalued, they become useless. Your right to offend with intent to offend is lessened.
Imagine having to make up a bunch of new Shakespearian Insults to hurl at that Arthritic Excuse for a Not Even Fair Weather Friend of yours. Now do that in 8 languages. Now do those in street slang (Modern Urban Vernacular) by location. You are [expletive-adverb elided] crazy to want this; I say keep the expletives underused and offensive, but remove the bureaucratic mechanisms to defend society from soundcrimes and spelledwordcrimes. Forum and context and other writing and rhetorical rules apply. That's all that applies. What do you mean, you improperly Christened serf? Say it clearly.
Define offensive language and talk about offense in words on paper or spoken or signed in your languages and more. Over the internet, automatically translated to a dead language and back. How do you say "f***" in Euskadi? in Latin? or is it "f***" with a noun? Is a meaning of "f***" personal nonsexual or sexually offensive? without the noun? I'm curious to know what we would use for "f***" if it were no longer functional as expletive? f*** or word-meaning-f***? Or abstract offensive concept equivalent-to-f***?
What about when an expletive needs translation away from or towards religion? "I defecate on the host" is a very common offensive exclamation in Spain not technically offensive in English. Here the "meaning" of the insult is lost when semantically broken up and properly translated... it lacks the description [common-expletive accepted-usage offensive-esp-to-catholics not-a-literal-description]
Usage of "%^@$*" (from comics) is offensive by lookslike-euphemismfor-expletive, whether or not you mean to use whitewashed offensive language; euphemisms are stand-ins for expletives. My teacher assumed I was using cynical-intenttooffend-bywayof-euphemism; I really had no idea what all the punctuation was about. Srsly. I was like eight years old!
Of course I followed rules on public scope and guidelines on offensive language; appropriate for all ages; the topic of bad language doesn't require such. Spoken form should substitute "f***" with "f-word" etc. watch out for anything that soundslike-expletive; spell it out letter by letter when nothing else will do. You silly "gee eye tee."
that's enough for the premiere Emily Blog Post!
(c) all rights reserved by Richard Walker in case I decide to do something commercial with this one
I very rarely spam people with email, but in the case of starting this blog, I did, and a few joined Vox.
Unless they join (OpenId notwithstanding) I cannot express the relationship between us.
Since Vox seems prepared to handle millions of accounts, and indeed encourages non-Voxers to join in order to comment, I submit this:
Allow a Voxer to invite people by arranging a stub blog associated with their email. An "activation link" guarantees that the email recipient can activate it with a single click. Also can timeout if not acted upon. Also perhaps mention OpenId support and if it allows them to bypass usual "per service per login" horribleness.
This is only a little more pushy than the mass invite email, and since you don't misuse the invite feature, I think Voxers would use this to encourage friends to read their blog; by enticing them with their-eyes-only posts and friends-only media for example.
As email grows less desirable, blogs and feeds and networks and forums can supplant it.
Warning: Web2.0 insider speak!
Né dans la région de Los Angeles au début des années soixante, Richard Walker commencé à jouer de la musique autour de l'âge de 7 ans. Élevé à Santa Barbara jusqu'à l'âge de 9 ans, il a connu une vie extrêmement variées et de l'éducation et a caractérisé le style de vie désordonné de ses parents comme des «pseudo-bohème». Certaines des dresser les cheveux sur la contes racontent qu'il peut comprendre la vie comme un enfant de culte religieux, Jouer de la musique dans les rues pour de l'argent, et la fréquentation de l'école catholique dans un petit village sur l'île de Majorque, en Espagne.
Richard considère la musique tout à fait littéralement son salut,
offrant la seule échapper à l'isolement et parfois la pauvreté. À partir de l'enregistreur et de la flûte, il a étudié le piano dès l'âge de la fin des années 16. Heureusement, il a trouvé l'inspiration et l'orientation dans son mentor, le regretté Robert Sheldon, qui a trouvé grâce à la San Francisco Conservatory of Music et avec qui il a poursuivi ses études intensives en piano et de l'interprétation pendant plus d'une décennie. Sheldon a été un étudiant de l'révéré Egon Petri, l'un des derniers plus grands pianistes du siècle, qui a également fourni un lien direct avec les grands maîtres Ferruccio Busoni et Franz Liszt.
Après
avoir vécu en Espagne pendant plusieurs années et en Angleterre et en
France pour des périodes plus courtes, Richard finalement installés
dans la baie de San Francisco en 1981. Il a travaillé en tant que soliste,
ensemble joueur et accompagnateur, a produit de nombreux concerts et
achevé en 2002 son troisième disque, son deuxième CD de compositions
improvisées. Son premier ouvrage, «The Performing Pianiste, un Pocket Primer» a été imprimé dans la première édition à l'été 2002. En 2003, Richard a co-produit deux disques, des enregistrements Ragtime
Bay Area pour un pianiste et a préparé une nouvelle édition de la
virtuosité chef-d'oeuvre posthume «Navarra» de Isaac Albéniz. En 2004, sa composition au piano «Nocturne» a été sélectionné pour être utilisé dans le film indépendant «Le Savant» du producteur et réalisateur, Robert Elvin. Richard contribué audio personnalisé effets
sonores et accessoires pour le film en utilisant classique et
l'avant-garde des techniques, et la musique de soumission à l'ASCAP
Film est actuellement en post-production, de mise au début de 2008.
La educación de Richard inclut l'éducation préscolaire, les cours comprend également de nombreuses années de la scolarité et de soutien scolaire alternatif, privé des leçons de musique, ainsi que de la musique traditionnelle de formation à New Haven, au Connecticut, Sussex, en Grande-Bretagne et City College de San Francisco.
Stephen Fry's just-launched "Podgrams" feature is here
Podcast description:
Stephen Fry discloses his work for the past two years including his performances for ITV's series "Kingdom", script writing for director Peter Jackson's forthcoming film "The Dam Busters" and the pitfalls of filming in the Amazon jungle and breaking his arm whilst preventing his not inconsiderable weight from plunging into the murky depths of the Amazon River.
He explains the rocky start in Ep. 1 in Ep. 2.
This will be on the final.
Does a "person link" to Paxton allow him to edit this post?
Apparently not.
Or is it just a convenience for referring to a Vox member, and is no different from linking the name Paxton to the URL http://paxblog.vox.com?
Not quite. If you hover over the person link above, it shows you that Paxton is a Vox user and allows easy communication and relationship editing between the reader of this post and Paxton.
I initially thought it might mean that Paxton is a contributor or subject of discussion, or perhaps to allow collaboration / multi-authorship.
At the very least it could also be a way to incorporate commentary into a post, and attribute the contribution.
Think of it as the "Just-in-time-post-comment-becomes-post-contribution" feature.
Please comment if you have something to add to this idea in general, but disregard it's practicality or actuality, and keep in mind this is a larger question for all blogs that allow comments, not just those on Vox.
What would make commentary more useful? What sort of commentary do you want to encourage? Do you want less commentary? Do you welcome disagreements?
Do you sometimes wish someone's "private message" were a comment, or vice-versa?
Philip Greenspun's comment moderation policy is interesting reading pertinent to questions posed here.
Terse positive commentary on Vox serves one important function: it tells you someone read your post.
However, it would be nice to know that in some other way, and assume that consistent readership without commentary is also to be taken as "positive feedback."
See future post Unproven Technology: ooVoo for more questions on comments
