New Comm Tech

This lecture was titled “Free Culture, Free Society”, and discussed Creative Commons and the idea of open source software.

International laws exist to protect the intellectual property (i.e. creative works, inventions) of people, and safeguard the right of these creators to control the financial gains and distribution of this content.  Intellectual property can be protected under several different means, including copyright, trademark and Creative Commons licenses.  It can be argued, however, that the former fosters the idea that knowledge and art are only available for the highest bidder.  Critics of copyright laws claim that artistic works belong to the masses and shouldn’t need to be licensed out. In other words, when it comes to creative content: the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Public domain refers to works which either have no copyright, or have had its license expire.  For example, if I were to download Salvador Dali’s 1929 film un chien andalou I would be within my full legal rights to do so (and also a slightly disturbed individual).  These expiry dates vary from country-to-country.  In Australia, artistic works generally become public domain between 50-70 years after publication (depending on the medium of the work in question). 

Creative Commons, on the other hand, is almost like a comprise between these two extremes.  Creative Commons is a way to skip the intermediaries and grant copyright to the masses (with conditions, of course).  As CC like to put it, instead of “all rights reserved” they’re “some rights reserved”.  If I were to post a video online of myself narrating an epic story that I had written about a magical Labradoodle  eating cheese, I could put a CC license on it.  This would allow other people to upload and modify my content (perhaps by adding a flash video to accompany it), as long as they didn’t use said content for financial gain.  This is a pretty rad compromise, considering that in 1989, the US passed a law that meant ALL content created (even without applying for copyright) was immediately deemed so.

These themes lead into the second part of the lecture, which focused on open source software.  It’s a similar concept, except involving free software distribution.  As a way of trying to gain a monopoly on the marker, Microsoft began profiteering by selling their OS software.  Originally, programs had been copied and shared accordingly, however Microsoft changed this.  However, through the combined innovation of Richard Stallman and Linus Torvald, GNU/Linux was created.  This allowed for free software (by the use of source codes) to be distributed to those savvy enough to know of them.  Unfortunately, GNU/Linux is still somewhat of a counter-cultural concept.  Windows seems to be gaining a greater monopoly every year, especially as more and more Apple users prefer to use Windows over Mac OS.