To be honest, answering a question about what I have learned from this course is a little difficult, since I must admit to having had plenty of experience using social networking tools prior to taking this class ... I first logged on to the World Wide Web the summer prior to my freshman year of college (1995), and have been "hooked" ever since, always eager to try the next "revolutionary" social service or join the latest "flavor of the month" web site (which, to be honest, more often than not simply fizzle and disappear with little fanfare). As such, I've always been interested in how these types of online tools could be applied to an institution - such as a library - as another avenue for reaching out to potential users.
So, I would have to say that a lot of the things that I have learned from this class have come from observing those of my fellow students who might not be as familiar with social networking tools as I was ... Now, I hope this doesn't come across as condescending (because that is certainly not my intent), but it was interesting coming from a place steeped in the "culture" of the online world, and seeing how other people adopt and interpret that world from a fresh perspective.
Seeing their growth over the course of this semester (I remember one person in particular stating that they never thought much about social networking before this class, which was just so different from my own experiences) was truly interesting to behold; I wish them all the best of luck in continuing to learn and grow within the virtual landscape (and convincing their respective libraries to adopt social networking policies of their own!) ...
As for what might come next for me personally, I will continue exploring options for my academic library (I'm a member of our Web Development Committee) in terms of advertising and promoting library services to our students within the virtual realm ... For example, while I maintain an "unofficial" Twitter feed that points out interesting materials found within the collection, there was a time when our library actually had its own account (@HCDinand) which has since been abandoned. At the time, the reason given to me was that (and I'm paraphrasing here) "Twitter is for celebrities, not libraries."
After taking this course, I believe I have some extra "ammunition" to try and persuade them otherwise!
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Thursday, July 21, 2011
"A (re)slice of life online, part four" by Howard Rheingold
I guess I'll have to be the one to say it ... As much as I believe that video games have a definite place in the library, I fail to see why librarians continuously turn to "Second Life" as an example to back up this viewpoint.
My brother (who works in the gaming industry) had a former boss leave for California a couple years back to join Linden Lab and work on the "re-design" of "Second Life." He showed me a few screenshots of what the new look of the game would be, and I must admit that it was rather impressive; however, as far as I can tell, it did little to actually maintain the level of popularity that "Second Life" once had ... The truth of the matter is that "Second Life" lost its relevance ages ago, and (unless you're talking about MMORPGs like "World of Warcraft") these types of games just do not have the level of popularity needed to justify their continued presence in the conversation of gaming in libraries.
Google attempted a "Second Life" clone called "Lively" ... it failed.
Sony, with its vast resources within the gaming world, started up its own version of "Second Life" called "Playstation Home" ... its level of user activity is a running joke, if not greatly exaggerated.
The fact remains that "Second Life" has been in decline for a long time now, and attempting to establish a presence within that virtual world is no longer worth the effort ... What I did like about this video was the use of other "participatory media" by Rheingold within his lectures (Flickr, blogs, wikis, video, etc.); it certainly seems as if he is getting his "brand" out there amongst his students (even if "Second Life" might not be the best place to collect all of those applications).
The other thing I liked about this video? The fact that Rheingold called it "the Second Life" ... That gave me a good chuckle :)
My brother (who works in the gaming industry) had a former boss leave for California a couple years back to join Linden Lab and work on the "re-design" of "Second Life." He showed me a few screenshots of what the new look of the game would be, and I must admit that it was rather impressive; however, as far as I can tell, it did little to actually maintain the level of popularity that "Second Life" once had ... The truth of the matter is that "Second Life" lost its relevance ages ago, and (unless you're talking about MMORPGs like "World of Warcraft") these types of games just do not have the level of popularity needed to justify their continued presence in the conversation of gaming in libraries.
Google attempted a "Second Life" clone called "Lively" ... it failed.
Sony, with its vast resources within the gaming world, started up its own version of "Second Life" called "Playstation Home" ... its level of user activity is a running joke, if not greatly exaggerated.
The fact remains that "Second Life" has been in decline for a long time now, and attempting to establish a presence within that virtual world is no longer worth the effort ... What I did like about this video was the use of other "participatory media" by Rheingold within his lectures (Flickr, blogs, wikis, video, etc.); it certainly seems as if he is getting his "brand" out there amongst his students (even if "Second Life" might not be the best place to collect all of those applications).
The other thing I liked about this video? The fact that Rheingold called it "the Second Life" ... That gave me a good chuckle :)
"Video games and the future of learning" by David Williamson Shaffer, Kurt R. Squire, Richard Halverson and James P. Gee
After reading Gee's book, I see many of his points being raised in this article (which would make sense since he is a co-author):
* Video games are a lot more socially-oriented than people give them credit for. Whereas schools "largely sequester students from one another and from the outside world," games "bring players together ... in the virtual world of the game and in the social community of its players"; aside from multiplayer gaming, players are encouraged to "read and write FAQs [and] participate in discussion forums" so that they may gather (as well as dissemeniate) information amongst their peers. This creates a much more social experience when it comes to learning about the games that they play, moreso than simply memorizing facts that are detached from any meaningful situation that might interest potential learners (which comprises the type of learning that is going on in our school systems).
* Game players have an opportunity to "explore new identities" by taking on the personas of the characters found in video games ... While these personas usually take the form of something outside of the realm of reality which the players themselves actually inhabit (wizards, space marines, professional athletes, etc.), such scenarios can also be applied to learning skills that may factor into the players' future job experience; the authors give the example of children playing the game "Madison 2200" and taking on the role of an urban planner, giving them the opportunity to look at problems from the perspective of someone fluent in the practices of urban ecology ("video games [make] it possible to 'learn by doing' ... [and] expose novices to the ways professionals make sense of typical problems").
* "Educational" video games can be used to provide students with "an opportunity to see the world in a variety of ways that are fundamentally grounded in meaningful activity" [emphasis mine] ... Again, by "placing" potential learners within a virtual world where they can experience and navigate their way through particular scenarios, it can provide them with the opportunity to acquire skills in a way that is meaningful for them ("Player learn biology by working as a surgeon, history by writing as a journalist, mathematics by designing buildings as an architect or engineer, geography by fighting as a soldier, or French by opening a restaurant ... More precisely, these players learn by inhabiting virtual worlds based on the way surgeons, journalists, architects, soldiers, and restaurateurs develop their epistemic frames").
* Unfortunately, the authors point out that gathering the type of information necessary to construct these games "requires more work than is currently invested in most 'educational' video games" ... We must remember that the video game industry is a for-profit business first and foremost, and the ultimate goal for the various companies is making money, not revolutionizing the American school system. Sadly, this is why a vast majority of "edutainment" games are horrible, because resources aren't being used to create a truly immersive experience (games like "Diner Dash" and "Cooking Mama" may offer rudimentary instruction in the culinary arts, but for someone to be able to "learn French by opening a restaurant" will involve a more pronouned focus on the ability of the player to "inhabit" the viewpoint and skill range of a true restaurateur).
* This quote sums things up nicely: "When knowledge is first and foremost a form of activity and experience - of doing something in the world within a community of practice - the facts and information eventually come for free ... A large body of facts that resists out-of-context memorization and rote learning comes easily if learners are immersed in activities and experiences that use these facts for plans, goals, and purposes within a coherent domain of knowledge."
The school experience shouldn't just be about memorizing facts and then regurgitating them (without actually understanding the context of what they mean or how they can be applied in real life) in order to get an "A" on one's report card; teachers should make the information "matter" to their students, and video games may provide the opportunity to do just that.
* Video games are a lot more socially-oriented than people give them credit for. Whereas schools "largely sequester students from one another and from the outside world," games "bring players together ... in the virtual world of the game and in the social community of its players"; aside from multiplayer gaming, players are encouraged to "read and write FAQs [and] participate in discussion forums" so that they may gather (as well as dissemeniate) information amongst their peers. This creates a much more social experience when it comes to learning about the games that they play, moreso than simply memorizing facts that are detached from any meaningful situation that might interest potential learners (which comprises the type of learning that is going on in our school systems).
* Game players have an opportunity to "explore new identities" by taking on the personas of the characters found in video games ... While these personas usually take the form of something outside of the realm of reality which the players themselves actually inhabit (wizards, space marines, professional athletes, etc.), such scenarios can also be applied to learning skills that may factor into the players' future job experience; the authors give the example of children playing the game "Madison 2200" and taking on the role of an urban planner, giving them the opportunity to look at problems from the perspective of someone fluent in the practices of urban ecology ("video games [make] it possible to 'learn by doing' ... [and] expose novices to the ways professionals make sense of typical problems").
* "Educational" video games can be used to provide students with "an opportunity to see the world in a variety of ways that are fundamentally grounded in meaningful activity" [emphasis mine] ... Again, by "placing" potential learners within a virtual world where they can experience and navigate their way through particular scenarios, it can provide them with the opportunity to acquire skills in a way that is meaningful for them ("Player learn biology by working as a surgeon, history by writing as a journalist, mathematics by designing buildings as an architect or engineer, geography by fighting as a soldier, or French by opening a restaurant ... More precisely, these players learn by inhabiting virtual worlds based on the way surgeons, journalists, architects, soldiers, and restaurateurs develop their epistemic frames").
* Unfortunately, the authors point out that gathering the type of information necessary to construct these games "requires more work than is currently invested in most 'educational' video games" ... We must remember that the video game industry is a for-profit business first and foremost, and the ultimate goal for the various companies is making money, not revolutionizing the American school system. Sadly, this is why a vast majority of "edutainment" games are horrible, because resources aren't being used to create a truly immersive experience (games like "Diner Dash" and "Cooking Mama" may offer rudimentary instruction in the culinary arts, but for someone to be able to "learn French by opening a restaurant" will involve a more pronouned focus on the ability of the player to "inhabit" the viewpoint and skill range of a true restaurateur).
* This quote sums things up nicely: "When knowledge is first and foremost a form of activity and experience - of doing something in the world within a community of practice - the facts and information eventually come for free ... A large body of facts that resists out-of-context memorization and rote learning comes easily if learners are immersed in activities and experiences that use these facts for plans, goals, and purposes within a coherent domain of knowledge."
The school experience shouldn't just be about memorizing facts and then regurgitating them (without actually understanding the context of what they mean or how they can be applied in real life) in order to get an "A" on one's report card; teachers should make the information "matter" to their students, and video games may provide the opportunity to do just that.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
"Percolating the power of play" by Sarah Faye Cohen, Timothy Minder, and Laurent Nishikawa
The two games mentioned in this article - "Searchlight" and "Dustin King: Locked and Literate" - sounded rather interesting, so I visited the Champlain College Library's website and was able to find more information on the project:
When I first read the description for "Searchlight" in the article, I imagined that the presentation of the game would have a correlation within the "for-profit" gaming business with titles like "Harvest Moon" or "Lost in Blue" (simple item-gathering and resource-management experiences that would be appropriate for younger audiences) ... However, the artwork from the screenshot provided now suggests to me a mixture of child-like innocence with more darker undertones (perhaps not as dark as a game like "Limbo", but somewhere along those lines).
As for "Dustin King", the description in the article immediately made me think of the "Ace Attorney" series; however, looking at the isometric tile-based design suggested in the screenshot, I'm now thinking that the gameplay would more closely resemble something like "Ultima Online" or "Final Fantasy Tactics" ... very intriguing.
Unfortunately, it looks like both games are still "in development", so I guess I'll just have to wait :(
Students play as Clara, a girl who has been charged with repairing the local lighthouse before nightfall. She travels across the various islands of her world and collects balls of light, which represent information that she can use to build her lighthouse in various styles. Every style requires a different kind of information that is found somewhere in the game world, so players must explore and learn to navigate the landscape of information before they can truly succeed. This metaphorical game includes seven mini-games, each with unique game play and stories.I must admit, the screenshots provided were of a much higher quality than I was initially expecting from their descriptions in the article ... In fact, after visiting this website, it kind of makes me want to play them!
Dustin King in Locked and Literate takes place in the laboratory and office building of the mysterious Dr. Spade. The player is tasked with exploring the building and delving into top secret information via computers, books, and office notes scattered throughout the complex. The player must navigate the building, web pages, and books to solve problems. In the world the main character Dustin, a secret agent investigating Spade Co., encounters a quirky worker from the complex along with a cast of unique, funny, and informative supporting characters who contact him through his wrist watch communicator. They help him find his way through the complex, solve problems he encounters along the way, and learn how to be information literate.
When I first read the description for "Searchlight" in the article, I imagined that the presentation of the game would have a correlation within the "for-profit" gaming business with titles like "Harvest Moon" or "Lost in Blue" (simple item-gathering and resource-management experiences that would be appropriate for younger audiences) ... However, the artwork from the screenshot provided now suggests to me a mixture of child-like innocence with more darker undertones (perhaps not as dark as a game like "Limbo", but somewhere along those lines).
As for "Dustin King", the description in the article immediately made me think of the "Ace Attorney" series; however, looking at the isometric tile-based design suggested in the screenshot, I'm now thinking that the gameplay would more closely resemble something like "Ultima Online" or "Final Fantasy Tactics" ... very intriguing.
Unfortunately, it looks like both games are still "in development", so I guess I'll just have to wait :(
"The case for video games in libraries" by Suellen S. Adams
Suellen starts off the introduction to her article by pointing out that some "educators and academics [believe] that perhaps video games are too trivial a pursuit to bring into the library" ... Amusing wordplay aside, these detractors should be reminded that books of fiction were once thought to be "too trivial" to include in library collections as well ("Facts only, libraries are just for research!").
In my opinion, this is simply another case of people dismissing something because they do not truly understand it (which is illustrated nicely by Suellen's quote from Squires that "games have come to typify the essentially subversive side of computing [emphasis mine]") ... A large amount of mistrust has been built up amongst the "older" generations - which includes several academics and librarians - when it comes to video games, because they don't take the time to explore this "world" that younger people find so easy to delve into; there was a point in time when older people didn't like/understand rock and roll music or comic books either, so they attempted to demonize such things for no other reason than the fact that it was something that young people enjoyed (they "got" it) and they didn't.
That's why it's important for those within the profession (such as through classes like LSC597!) to become educated about the benefits of programs like gaming in libraries, and not just base their opinions on the medium solely through some slander piece they saw on FOX News about violent video games ... Video games hold many possiblities and tackle many genres, just like television and motion pictures; some might be appropriate for teaching patrons information literacy skills, some might not be, but that doesn't mean that the entire industry should be ignored and cast aside as a result (imagine a library refusing to stock any movie DVDs because of one title - let's say one of the "Saw" films - that they chose to represent the entire medium!).
In fact, as Suellen points out, an unwillingness to accept video games into libraries is misguided because they have already been implementing "games" within their outreach programs/collection development for years now (the only difference being a move into the "digital" realm) ... She mentions storytelling as an example of "emphatic identification with the protagonist of the story," something that the interactive nature of gaming also offers to its users; this reminds me of Scott Nicholson's 2008 article "Reframing gaming", where he argues that gaming in the library could serve as a type of "storytime for the rest of us," not just for the very young ("Having a variety of gaming activities can draw interest from not only the teens who are drawn to video games but also the adults and seniors who may be interested in other forms of gaming").
Also, Suellen makes the observation that "libraries have hosted a variety of game-related programs in the past [such as] chess clubs, board games and pencil and paper role-playing groups"; again, it is only because video games carry a (largely unfair) negative stigma with certain individuals that they are treated as somehow separate and "different" from these types of activities ... Once again, this is a subject that Scott Nicholson also addresses, and - if anyone is interested in further educating themselves about this subject - I highly recommend that you check out his series of videos about gaming in libraries via YouTube.
In my opinion, this is simply another case of people dismissing something because they do not truly understand it (which is illustrated nicely by Suellen's quote from Squires that "games have come to typify the essentially subversive side of computing [emphasis mine]") ... A large amount of mistrust has been built up amongst the "older" generations - which includes several academics and librarians - when it comes to video games, because they don't take the time to explore this "world" that younger people find so easy to delve into; there was a point in time when older people didn't like/understand rock and roll music or comic books either, so they attempted to demonize such things for no other reason than the fact that it was something that young people enjoyed (they "got" it) and they didn't.
That's why it's important for those within the profession (such as through classes like LSC597!) to become educated about the benefits of programs like gaming in libraries, and not just base their opinions on the medium solely through some slander piece they saw on FOX News about violent video games ... Video games hold many possiblities and tackle many genres, just like television and motion pictures; some might be appropriate for teaching patrons information literacy skills, some might not be, but that doesn't mean that the entire industry should be ignored and cast aside as a result (imagine a library refusing to stock any movie DVDs because of one title - let's say one of the "Saw" films - that they chose to represent the entire medium!).
In fact, as Suellen points out, an unwillingness to accept video games into libraries is misguided because they have already been implementing "games" within their outreach programs/collection development for years now (the only difference being a move into the "digital" realm) ... She mentions storytelling as an example of "emphatic identification with the protagonist of the story," something that the interactive nature of gaming also offers to its users; this reminds me of Scott Nicholson's 2008 article "Reframing gaming", where he argues that gaming in the library could serve as a type of "storytime for the rest of us," not just for the very young ("Having a variety of gaming activities can draw interest from not only the teens who are drawn to video games but also the adults and seniors who may be interested in other forms of gaming").
Also, Suellen makes the observation that "libraries have hosted a variety of game-related programs in the past [such as] chess clubs, board games and pencil and paper role-playing groups"; again, it is only because video games carry a (largely unfair) negative stigma with certain individuals that they are treated as somehow separate and "different" from these types of activities ... Once again, this is a subject that Scott Nicholson also addresses, and - if anyone is interested in further educating themselves about this subject - I highly recommend that you check out his series of videos about gaming in libraries via YouTube.
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
"Library Law blog" by Mary Minow and Peter Hirtle
I couldn't help noticing that the first two pages of posts for this blog (spanning April 3rd through June 29th) have managed to generate a grand total of one comment between them ... Not a particularly good sign that this section of Minow and Hirtle's website is stirring up conversation within the library community about "issues concerning libraries and the law."
Nevertheless, I still see this site as a great resource for librarians to maintain awareness about the various legal issues/battles going on that directly affect the profession ... I could see right away that several timely and pertinent topics were being discussed by the authors, including copyright restrictions on e-books, the legality of the Library of Congress' collection of pre-1972 sound recordings, and Google's possible mishandling of user privacy.
The posts I read were not bogged down with needlessly technical jargon, or "legalese" that would make sense only to other lawyers ... Rather, all of the ideas were discussed and summarized in a clean and easy-to-understand fashion, giving readers a chance to truly digest the facts and contemplate the ramifications these cases will have (or might have in the future).
Nevertheless, I still see this site as a great resource for librarians to maintain awareness about the various legal issues/battles going on that directly affect the profession ... I could see right away that several timely and pertinent topics were being discussed by the authors, including copyright restrictions on e-books, the legality of the Library of Congress' collection of pre-1972 sound recordings, and Google's possible mishandling of user privacy.
The posts I read were not bogged down with needlessly technical jargon, or "legalese" that would make sense only to other lawyers ... Rather, all of the ideas were discussed and summarized in a clean and easy-to-understand fashion, giving readers a chance to truly digest the facts and contemplate the ramifications these cases will have (or might have in the future).
Monday, July 11, 2011
"Free culture: the future of creativity, collaboration, and knowledge" by Elizabeth Stark
Some random thoughts while watching Stark's fascinating talk from Quinnipiac University on March 25th, 2010:
* I remember back in 1998 when the "Steamboat Willie" copyright case was in the news, and everyone was wondering how Disney was going to react ... Here's a good summary from the LA Times.
* People shouldn't be surprised that the internet has changed the rules; copyright law as it stands now "doesn't necessarily make sense in an age where the ability to copy a file verbatim... has virtually no cost" (these laws were created in an age of physical goods, not digital).
* It's good to hear Stark remind people that peer to peer file sharing is not inherently illegal; many indie bands and other small-time businesses upload their material to these sites with the hopes of drawing in new fans and getting their message out to a world-wide audience.
* I like the term "digital restrictions management" ... http://defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm
* As Cory Doctorow says, DRM does not work!
* "Free culture" does not just mean that you don't have to pay for anything ... "Free" in this case means "free expression" and "free speech"; it is "the idea that the ability to access, share and re-rip culture is a good thing for society, and that such a culture requires an environment of technological freedom and free expression to go along with it" (an "open source culture").
* The meaning of "net neutrality" has sadly been muddled along party lines by our political leaders, but it basically means that "everybody should be able to access all parts of the internet equally" (in my opinion, the upholding of net neutrality via government regulation is not a perfect solution, more like the "lesser of two evils") ...
* "In a free culture, people would have the right to share and re-rip culture, and cultural production would not be dependent upon exclusive rights, but this doesn't necessarily mean that people creating culture would not be able to make a living; people often assume that if one makes culture available, there would be no models for survival, but in fact [in] many cases making one's work available to share and access and rework can actually benefit the creator rather than detracting" ... For example, the aforementioned Cory Doctorow has all of his novels available for free on his website without DRM, and yet his books still consistently reach the number one spot on bestseller lists for science ficition (he builds up such positive goodwill with his fanbase - through book signings and other social interactions - that they're willing to still support him financially and buy his books even though they are available for free).
* "Transformative works" like Pogo's "Alice in Wonderland" remix are not hurting big companies like Disney and their ability to make money ... No one is going to watch that 3-minute video and think "Well, I don't have to buy that Alice In Wonderland Blu Ray now, I just watched the movie for free!" (it has become a dramatically different work).
* If we didn't have "fair use" laws, then we wouldn't have VCRs, DVDs, Blu Ray players, DVRs, etc. etc.
* "Fair use is an incredibly important doctrine in the digital age, and something along the lines of DRM as discussed can inhibit making it fair use" ... I personally believe that a fan of a TV show, who is using a 10-second clip from a copyrighted DVD in a YouTube video to help express their love for said show, is totally different from someone ripping an entire season of the same show from a Blu Ray disc and uploading the whole she-bang to BitTorrent (one can actually gain new viewers for the property and thus help the copyright holder, while the other can obviously stunt sales of legal copies and end up hurting the copyright holder).
* Ideals like the democratization of culture ("where anyone can participate") and "citizen media" have many benefits ... as well as some drawbacks (for example, Wikipedia is a good starting resource, but I wouldn't necessarily consider it the definitive source for factual information)
* There is no knowledge that is not power (a rallying cry for librarians!) ...
* The bottom line is that societal norms are changing and copyright law needs to change with them ... Some might call this "legitimizing piracy", but the fact remains that we are playing by a different set of rules now ("In many cases, these exceptions and these laws are out of step with reality").
* Quinnipiac provided a helpful list of some of the site discussed during Stark's talk via their website.
* I remember back in 1998 when the "Steamboat Willie" copyright case was in the news, and everyone was wondering how Disney was going to react ... Here's a good summary from the LA Times.
* People shouldn't be surprised that the internet has changed the rules; copyright law as it stands now "doesn't necessarily make sense in an age where the ability to copy a file verbatim... has virtually no cost" (these laws were created in an age of physical goods, not digital).
* It's good to hear Stark remind people that peer to peer file sharing is not inherently illegal; many indie bands and other small-time businesses upload their material to these sites with the hopes of drawing in new fans and getting their message out to a world-wide audience.
* I like the term "digital restrictions management" ... http://defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm
* As Cory Doctorow says, DRM does not work!
* "Free culture" does not just mean that you don't have to pay for anything ... "Free" in this case means "free expression" and "free speech"; it is "the idea that the ability to access, share and re-rip culture is a good thing for society, and that such a culture requires an environment of technological freedom and free expression to go along with it" (an "open source culture").
* The meaning of "net neutrality" has sadly been muddled along party lines by our political leaders, but it basically means that "everybody should be able to access all parts of the internet equally" (in my opinion, the upholding of net neutrality via government regulation is not a perfect solution, more like the "lesser of two evils") ...
* "In a free culture, people would have the right to share and re-rip culture, and cultural production would not be dependent upon exclusive rights, but this doesn't necessarily mean that people creating culture would not be able to make a living; people often assume that if one makes culture available, there would be no models for survival, but in fact [in] many cases making one's work available to share and access and rework can actually benefit the creator rather than detracting" ... For example, the aforementioned Cory Doctorow has all of his novels available for free on his website without DRM, and yet his books still consistently reach the number one spot on bestseller lists for science ficition (he builds up such positive goodwill with his fanbase - through book signings and other social interactions - that they're willing to still support him financially and buy his books even though they are available for free).
* "Transformative works" like Pogo's "Alice in Wonderland" remix are not hurting big companies like Disney and their ability to make money ... No one is going to watch that 3-minute video and think "Well, I don't have to buy that Alice In Wonderland Blu Ray now, I just watched the movie for free!" (it has become a dramatically different work).
* If we didn't have "fair use" laws, then we wouldn't have VCRs, DVDs, Blu Ray players, DVRs, etc. etc.
* "Fair use is an incredibly important doctrine in the digital age, and something along the lines of DRM as discussed can inhibit making it fair use" ... I personally believe that a fan of a TV show, who is using a 10-second clip from a copyrighted DVD in a YouTube video to help express their love for said show, is totally different from someone ripping an entire season of the same show from a Blu Ray disc and uploading the whole she-bang to BitTorrent (one can actually gain new viewers for the property and thus help the copyright holder, while the other can obviously stunt sales of legal copies and end up hurting the copyright holder).
* Ideals like the democratization of culture ("where anyone can participate") and "citizen media" have many benefits ... as well as some drawbacks (for example, Wikipedia is a good starting resource, but I wouldn't necessarily consider it the definitive source for factual information)
* There is no knowledge that is not power (a rallying cry for librarians!) ...
* The bottom line is that societal norms are changing and copyright law needs to change with them ... Some might call this "legitimizing piracy", but the fact remains that we are playing by a different set of rules now ("In many cases, these exceptions and these laws are out of step with reality").
* Quinnipiac provided a helpful list of some of the site discussed during Stark's talk via their website.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)