[Community_studios] Re: copyright cage comment
av at total-knowledge.com
Sat Aug 16 05:44:31 EDT 2003
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Jonathan Zittrain wrote:
> Thanks much for your note. I'll check out your site -- apart from the
> topics in the copyright article, I'm very interested in the free software
> movement, and am working now on a paper about SCO v. IBM. We've got our
> own GPL'd offering at <http://h2o.law.harvard.edu>. Another torch lit...
> And, sure, link away!
I think, it would be nice for them to link to Open Studios either.
> At 04:26 PM 8/3/2003, tom poe wrote:
> >Hi: Enjoyed your article. Found it most interesting. Would like to
> >link to it for others on our web site.
> >Stanford's CCRMA site and the Agnula site [consortium of research
> >institutes and universities in Europe] offer Open Source solutions for
> >loading a low-end computer with everything needed to learn how to read
> >and write music, make professional quality recordings, and, when
> >combined with applications like Cinelerra, make theater-quality movies
> >[full featured movies]. Obviously, the cost to individuals is something
> >less than $1000USD, and the cost of producing competing products in
> >entertainment is measured in pennies, not millions of dollars.
> >When such equipment is used, the ability of an individual to utilize the
> >Internet to communicate with a worldwide audience, by placing their demo
> >works on the Internet Archive, or with Ibiblio.org, and their own web
> >sites, opens up a new world for musicians, artists, and authors.
> >At some point, or at least in the mind of Open Studios, every community
> >in every country will have a community-based recording studio offering
> >residents free recording services. If not before, then surely at that
> >point, copyright law will have to change, as it will be demonstrated
> >beyond doubt that individuals can indeed make money without the aid of
> >copyright. At the same time, some restrictions can be retained as seen
> >as reasonable, not by special interest groups, but by the public.
> >For those of us at Open Studios, the work being done at Creative Commons
> >Project represents such future changes suggested above.
> >In your article, you mentioned:"Overhauling copyright will have costs to
> >some. In the absence of tough copyright controls, investors may decide
> >not to underwrite a $200 million blockbuster film because copying of the
> >final product may unduly reduce their expected profit."
> >Independent films have proliferated as technology has advanced. In the
> >Digital Age, the cost is now down to a point that most individuals are
> >able to enter into movie-making. Over time, there is every reason to
> >expect that independent films which are able to be shown in a wide range
> >of venues, from libraries to coffee houses, to bars, to restaurants will
> >impact on the public's interest in Hollywood. The day of the $200
> >million blockbuster would seem to be ending. The attraction for
> >Sundance Studios and other firms emphasizing independent films will
> >offer investors far greater returns on their investment. Maybe, just
> >maybe, there will be yet another reason for Hollywood, the RIAA, and the
> >MPAA to engage in histrionics!
> >Tom Poe
> >Open Studios
> >Reno, NV
> Community_studios mailing list
> Community_studios at lists.ibiblio.org
More information about the Community_studios