Intellectual Property

I recently enabled adding audio to one of my virtual communities, expecting users to upload voice message and become engaged in audio blogging...

It was quite a surprise to me when one of the users started to post her poems accompanied by commercial music.

Although I believe that no limitations should be imposed upon knowledge and content distribution, I have always been very careful about the content that's posted on my websites and on-line of projects, since it truly makes no sense to become a target of corporate media lawyers and risk losing the work of 10 years.

But this time it was different. If MySpace.com and YouTube.com are doing it, why shouldn't we do it? Note that this is one of the main reasons such a clunky site as MySpace.com ranks among the top 10 most visited websites according to Alexa.

Below is an interesting excerpt from Thomas Jefferson in 1813, as quoted by Stanford Law professor Larry Lessig (creator of the Creative Commons license) in his book the Future of Ideas...

Keep in mind that this was written 23 years after the creation of the US Patent Office, which was founded in part on the principles and guidance of Thomas Jefferson himself, who did not believe that ideas should be patented, but only physical inventions and who insisted on patent applications to include models.

A thousand years after its publication, the UK government hopes to cash in on one of its earliest and oldest surviving public records. The Domesday Book, published in 1086 is considered the foundation of the UK's National Archives.

Its text and images are now on-line, catalogued and indexed, fully searchable by anyone from anywhere around the world for free. Should you want a printed copy of the 1,000 year old document that describes the county where you were born or the village where you spend your honeymoon, a mere 3.5 pounds will do.

Cultural and historical knowledge is promoted, awareness on the value of National Archives is achieved and revenue for sustainability is generated.

All through open content, free access to information and charging for value added services.

A collection of notes on Intellectual Property, Open Content, Copyrights, Authoring and Alternative Compensation Methods for Authors.

El caso de derecho de autor y propiedad intelectual sobre las fotografías es uno de mis argumentos favoritos. Y me gusta argumentarlo mucho directamente con las agencias noticiosas cuando imparten lectures sobre derecho de autor.

Las agencias noticiosas despliegan sus fotógrafos por el mundo para retratar la miseria y hacer fortuna en base a ella, donde quiera que se encuentre.

Le toman una foto a un niño desamparado por la hambruna, a un ciudadano mutilado por la guerra y la foto le da la vuelta al mundo y cobran miles de dólares en royalties, de los cuáles ni un centavo va al protagonista de la foto -- que no es el fotógrafo sino el fotografiado!

The Purpose of Regulatory Legislation:
To Maximize Total Social Wealth

The purpose of any regulatory Law is to ensure that the markets or activities it regulates maximize society value under the current (and preferably future) conditions of society, not to guarantee special benefits to a reduced group of society members or to perpetuate regulations that no longer respond to current society conditions.

Society Has Changed

We are in a transition period, where markets are adjusting and legislation and regulatory frameworks have to evolve and adapt to these new conditions. Insisting on perpetuating and extending regulation conditions that respond to the past (as the media corporations successfully lobbying for) is not viable in the mid and long term and not in the best interest of society.

In his book Free Culture (available on-line at www.free-culture.cc), Lawrence Lessig insists on the dangers of trying to regulate through restrictive legislation a changing market and social environment.

The End of Piracy

It is most likely that in the next few years, content piracy will become obsolete thanks to the advances of technology and networks.

There will be no need to illegally download songs or movies when they can listened or watched at any time on demand from cell phones, interactive radios and TV sets, game consoles, Personal Computers or any other device connected to the network.

The only difference is that in that not so distant future, the telecommunications companies will get a cut of the content royalties by providing access to it and the authors will be compensated.

It is even likely that the cost of accessing this content on demand will be part of a bulk service package with limited or unlimited access to content.

Evolving Markets respond and adapt

• Cable companies in developed countries are starting to offer "on demand" service packages (such as HBO on demand) that allow subscribers to watch specific movies and programs at any time.

It is entirely acceptable and common practice to go to a local library and borrow a book (or a movie, audio recording or video game in modern libraries) and have full access to it and even take it home without paying anything.

It is common practice for many libraries to allow people to borrow books via the traditional postal service. The only expense involved is the postage fees. Why would that be different from legally allowing us to skip the 2 weeks wait for the book to arrive and browse it instantly through the Internet?

I got a response from someone quite disturbed with my "Open Content and Piracy" post. She says that what most people from the new generations are doing is nothing but stealing and should be treated as bands of thieves.

I beg to differ. It is not stealing. It is accessing content that is kept from our access.

Of course Open Content and Piracy are not the same thing and I'm pretty sure some people will be angry and consider it a blasphemy to put both terms in the same sentence. Others will be glad and will say that someone finally put them where they belong: together, claiming that "Open Content" is just an excuse for "Piracy" and denial of Intellectual Property. Actually, I disagree with all of the above.

Difference between Open Content and Piracy

Open Content is about developing content, making it freely available to others and giving consent for its open distribution.