[Rumori] Register article on CC

[PeterALopez]

Mr. Orlowski seems to be a Dvorak link friend:
http://www.badpress.net/ilike.html

and Dvorak went to great lengths to get an opinion which might might explain to him the merits of CC:
from http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1838244,00.asp
"I have begged critics of the system, such as The Register's Andrew Orlowski, to explain to me how Creative Commons works or what it's supposed to do that current copyright law doesn't do. He says, "It does nothing."

That's some lengthy multi sourced investigation.  These two are tag teaming this one for some reason.

The last sentence of the Register article shows one of the authors questionable insights:
"Creative Commons is a cute pose, but the problems it seeks to remedy go unsolved. Finding a way to reward creators, which the project doesn't even attempt to address, remains more urgent as ever. ®"

It seems, that it's all about the pay day with this statement, but that's not a goal of CC, imo.  The fact that when a creator uses CC material to create, they don't have to worry about going through the non creative process of requesting permission, that seems like a reward to me.  Not of cash but precious time and energy.

A great blog post about the permission requesting game can be read at:
http://www.darknet.com/2005/07/when_the_studio.html

The point being:
"This is the quandary millions of us face today: The Hollywood studios demand that we ask for permission to borrow from their works — and then they deny our requests as a matter of course."

Now yes a new solution to getting artists funds easierly has not come about.  And it seems unlikely that the world will change it's position that artists create and eat the initial production/distribution costs and thus funds from the selling of the creative works helps the author, if they so choose, to continue working.  It's about the future creative effort not the recouping of costs, in some cases.

Chuck D in a cnn podcast (~30 minutes in) phrases it more elloquently:
"You can't totally emmerse (art) into the context of commerce, so you want the fan to enjoy what you have to offer and you want to consider what they can spend as a donation, as suppost to something they feel they have to spend their money on."
http://www.cnn.com/services/podcasting/ 
File Sharing (7:53 p.m. ET, June 2) [Renay San Miguel on peer-to-peer file sharing and the music industry.]

This for me is one of the divisions between the corporate industry system and CC.  Their goals differ.  One wants to be heard more then getting every possible compensation of every presentation of the work.  the other believes they need to be payed (beacuse they've spent so much upfront) before you enjoy.  they both """"work"""" for now.

a fun post to the FC-discuss list about the original Dvorak article shows that the author is not always aware of what the company which pays him is up to:

from the Dvorak article:
"Why not commercial purposes? What difference does it make, if everyone is free and easy about this? In other words, a noncommercial site could distribute a million copies of something and that's okay, but a small commercial site cannot deliver two copies if it's for commercial purposes. What is this telling me?"

Mr. Warner Wrote:
"My favorite part is the "Reprint" button at the bottom of Dvorak's article
which, when clicked, asks you if you're going to reprint it for commercial use
or noncommercial use and requires you to purchase a license only if you're
commercial."


The random blanket statements with no reference, really isn't much to pay attention too.  I don't even know where to start with the jump glitch statement.  If you view it from the majority of the public's perception, they've never been into glitch as i define it.  (and since my definition is my own and not written here, how's the weather by you?)  as for remixing on the retreat for ten years.  i think that's off.  it's more like 15, for corporate industry releases, elsewhere, it's growing every year.  technology made it easier for people like me to get in the game.  I didn't know about remix culture 5 years ago, yet i'm discussing it now.  (first embarrising rumori post (06/2001) and yes viriginia it's about star wars... http://detritus.net/contact/rumori/200106/0158.html)

Dvorak gets briefly into his problem with copyright as it stands.  the idea that Picassso's work is covered by the ever expanding system is something he's against.  but he doesn't have any ideas on how to fix that problem, so he's attacking a solution to another aspect of copyright which people had found fault with, as if one solution was to solve everything.  he's frustrated.  maybe the article is projection of some form.  
PeterALopez