Web 2.0 and the dissolution of intellectual property

[sandra_lanimil]

I’m working towards being a professional in the communication and design business. This means I am kept up to date on the trends in the media world. One of these trends - the next huge one - is nicknamed Web 2.0. It’s already a tired term, but it basically applies to social media (such as, for example, Livejournal, MySpace, forums, etc etc.).

Comments

[unsubtle]

Here via photogene... and to be honest, whatever your personal philosophy on the subject is, it still comes down to respecting someone else's work. And the fact that "We're not starving in Darfur" doesn't change anything about respect (sorry it's just kind of a peeve of mine when this is used as a defense). I'm also somewhat disturbed that you are encouraging people to steal more icons that aren't yours.

And I'd disagree about whether it matters. In music, for example, it's pretty sad when people love an artist "so much" but are unwilling to shell out the $10 to support them.

[unsubtle]

Would this free-for-all apply to your writing? Your art? Your character personalities? Maybe to you making an icon is an easy five-second process, but to someone else it could mean a lot. I know a lot of friends and artists who spend an incredible amount of time and energy making beautiful icons. I guess I don't see the big deal about crediting someone else's work, such a small gesture that means so much to the person who made it. K, I'm done now.

[sandra_lanimil]

It isn’t personal philosophy. It’s a matter of fact in the media/communication world that this is how the broad mass of users behave today and it will only become more prominent in the future.

On the matter of respect; I’m not advocating actively not crediting - I am advocating a frame of mind in which it isn’t hugely important whether or not credit is given, because half the time it probably won’t be. I doubt these people you speak of who spend time making icons are crediting the professional photographers who have taken the pictures they’re working with? In spite of the fact that it’s arguably a hugely greater creative achievement to be, say, a fashion photographer than an amateur iconmaker. This is also where perspective comes in - to my mind, coming down like the wrath of heaven on someone who doesn’t credit you for an icon shows a rather narrow and petty frame of mind. Personally, I have better things to do with my life and time

[unsubtle]

Hm. I'm not sure what to say, because half of this discussion is a normal discussion and half is sneaking in jabs at me and those who might agree with me. So I think I'm just going to move along.

[sandra_lanimil]

I know my tone isn't quite as polite as netiquette requires, but I don't know you well enough to know exactly where you stand. I think you make sound arguments, and I'm very glad that you do. It's infinitely more interesting, and an excellent opportunity to think further on the topic for me. I'm not stabbing at you - I'm stabbing at the drama makers, and you certainly don't come across as such.

[sandra_lanimil]

You have a sound point though; it's much more enlightening to discuss the matter at hand than to opinion on how others choose to act.

[sandra_lanimil]

Ah, and you've pointed out an interesting aspect of it:

guess I don't see the big deal about crediting someone else's work, such a small gesture that means so much to the person who made it.

And why does it mean a lot? This is because the currency on the internet isn't money - it's attention. So to answer your question in those terms - yes, it's perfectly alright with me not to get attention for a piece of writing or an icon or an artwork (not that I make those). I don't need a big neon sign pointing to me; the fact that someone woudl find it worth using speaks to it's quality in and off itself, wouldn't you say?
In plain terms - yes. You can take my words, my art, my icons. And I don’t need to be credited, or told. I put it on the net with the understanding that this means I am making it available for a huge amount of people. I don’t think it’s very likely that anyone would be enormously interested in using my stuff, but if they do, that’s fine. Must mean it’s got some measure of inspiration

[shecrows]

the thing is, if anyone is to be credited, it should really be the person who took the picture (in the case of icons) or wrote the book from which someone is taking characters/places (in the case of fanfic), et cetera. logically, anyway; that's where the legal ownership lies. the people who make icons out of other people's pictures or write fanfic about other people's characters really have no real legal right to what they're creating.

however, i agree with you that, in a sense, it's a matter of respecting not only a person's wishes (in spite of the fact that they're legally unfounded) but also the work and thought and creativity that a person puts into that fic/character/icon. that's why i credit, as a general rule. not because it's the right thing to do, but because i appreciate people creating things for my (and everyone else's) enjoyment. i also know that when people aren't credited for what they do, it discourages them from continuing to make icons/write fic/roleplay/whatever. and that would suck. i've seen countless icon makers

[sandra_lanimil]

I agree completely with everything you said here.

[unsubtle]

I definitely agree that there is no legal foundation, and there is certainly a logical paradox in asking for credit on a manipulation of someone else's work. You summed up my thoughts on the subject perfectly with the terms appreciation and respect.

I'm not going to pull the "slippery slope" card here, but I do wonder where the "all's fair" mentality stops. Graphics, icons, fanfic, fanart, and so forth... My brain is melting so I'm gonna stop now :)

[shecrows]

it's definitely an interesting topic, and i can't even really sum it up into one of those 'it really all comes down to ...' statements, because there's a lot involved. in a sense, i can look at it as a benign form of manipulation: i credit so that the people who make the things i like keep making them. that's what it comes down to, for me. but idk

[unsubtle]

*lazerz your brain* MWAHAHA my destruction spreads!

Yeah, anyway, a conversation like this inevitably descends into a philosophical conversation about the nature of intellectual property and "What, exactly, is art?" and things like that. Well, maybe "descend" is the wrong word XD but whatevers. The discussion about companies accepting/working with the Interwebs is a cool one to think about. And the boys in that video are super cute :3

[shecrows]

YOU'RE -- YOU'RE MEAN. YOU'RE VERY MEAN. actually, you know, if my brain has to go in a way of my choosing, i'd say lasering comes second only to being eaten by zombies.

those boys are adorable, alskjdfahaha. maybe that gets you points with the legal systems that be. 'golly, you're cute, we'll work with you instead of suing you! no big deal, guys! keep on keepin' on!'

and, yeah, it can deteriorate/escalate (however you want to look at it, i guess) to a philosophical debate. but then, pretty much anything can.