[cc-community] Benjamin Mako Hill on Creative Commons
zotz at 100jamz.com
Mon Aug 1 20:55:45 EDT 2005
On Monday 01 August 2005 03:47 pm, Rob Myers wrote:
> On 1 Aug 2005, at 19:57, Greg London wrote:
> > your "reality" isn't supported historically.
> > I mention this in my bounty hunters book,
> Which is excellent:
> I didn't realise there was a print edition. I just ordered a copy.
> > but basically,
> > copyright and patent laws came into existence about the
> > same time that teh renassaince occurred.
> The ideas came before the exploitation. Copyright came some time
> after. And not at the epicentre of the renaissance. And to limit
> exploitation of ideas, not ensure it.
> > i.e. about the same time that intellectual ideas were
> > being recognized as valuable in and of themselves.
> And hijackings became popular around the time more people could
> afford air travel. Therefore hijackings drove the development of air
> > That isn't much of a track record.
> Let's separate high culture, folk culture, and mass culture.
This seperation is interesting as are the ideas that follow.
> High culture is paid for by patrons. It is pre-paid, any copying
> simply enhances its reputation.
> Folk culture is made by ordinary folk using their own means. This
> used to be knives and wood, or flutes, or whatever, but now means
> stock PCs. Spot the problem here...
> Mass culture is kitsch, approriated folk culture that is mass
> produced and sold to the masses. It is mass culture that copyright
> applies to the exploitation of. But it does not differentiate between
> mass, folk and high culture. And it only really encourages mass
> culture. This is part of the problem.
Another part of the problem is that the big players in mass culture have seen
to it that the laws have changed (to protect the starving artists) in ways
which make it much more difficult for folk culture to function as it likes
to. This is some of the friction I refer to in other posts. One example is
that now all works are automatically copyrighted "all rights reserved" when
fixed, with or without copyright notices affixed. This gums up the works for
folk culture as far as I can see.
> Even if, for the sake of argument, we agree that professional/"high"
> artists will only create for money
Supossedly, a lot of high artists do it for the reputation and disdain the
money. I will let others comment on the veracity of that thougt.
> (they'd do better to train in law
> or accounting, and if they expect to do it with CDs or canvasses
> they'd do better to buy a lottery ticket, but anyway), there is the
> problem that folk or private culture is now being exposed to the same
> demands (if value then right, to Lessigise) as official or commercial
And so, those uf us who want to play a different game (not the mass culture
game) are seeking ways to do so.
> - Rob.
all the best,
More information about the cc-community