A Little Common Sense Goes a Long Way

Before I get to the real meat of this post, I'd like to quote something from the book that really has nothing to do with the rest of the post. It does, however have quite a bit of relevancy to my “part two” paper about intellectual property rights of computer software.

"IBM is increasingly shifting its focus to the GNU/Linux operating system, the most famous bit of "free software"-and IBM is emphatically a commercial entity. Thus, to support "open source and free software" is not to oppose commercial entities. It is, instead, to support a mode of software development that is different from Microsoft's"

I really like this quote because it does a very good job of describing the difference between an open source style of development and a "Microsoft" style of development. The truth is that Microsoft isn't the only thing out there. And they really aren't the best. Firefox has done a good job of proving this. Firefox was created by a bunch of guys that thought that they could make a web browser that is better than Internet Explorer. Now, Firefox is largely run by software programmers that come home from their day job and make their contribution to Firefox in their spare time. This is the true spirit of sharing open source code to make a better product than you would have otherwise. Microsoft has done such a good job of monopolizing the software industry that any other approach to software development is generally thought of as strange and outlandish. These things really are not strange, however, they are just different and innovative. Innovation. That is the one thing that human progress can never get enough of.

Anyways, on to the real blog.

There seem to be some fundamental, underlying concepts that ring clear in the conclusion and the rest of the book. The one of primary interest is common sense. Common sense, logic, and practicality. So much of the way things are done in the copyright and patent world are done because of tradition. The traditional way of doing things is not always the best way of doing things, however.

I'd like to cite an example from my own experience. It stems from my experience of going to a Lutheran Christian high school. I was not raised as a Lutheran, but if I could be described as anything, it would probably be Baptist, which is the type of grade school I went to. Thus there were naturally certain doctrines in the Lutheran denomination that I did not agree with. While I will not get into the specifics of these disagreements, as this blog is hardly the place for a theological debate, I will hit at the underlying principles.

If my religion teacher told the class something about how the Lutheran Church does something a certain way or has a certain belief, I would look at the specific scripture that the doctrine was based off of and challenge the teacher. This is because the scripture as I read it did not mean what the Lutherans were taking it to mean. The root to this difference in belief stems largely from the fact that the Lutherans are known to be very traditional in doctrine. This is because of the fact that they formed as a product of the reformation of the Roman Catholic Church. Everyone knows how traditional Catholics usually are. Well, Lutherans are quite similar. The teacher would defend the Lutheran doctrines based mainly on traditional beliefs. They have done things a certain way for so long that they cannot even imagine doing it a different way. Why would they deviate from something that has worked so well for them in the past? Even if something might possibly be better or make more logical sense, the Lutherans would often shy away from it because it is different from what they are used to.

This seems to be largely the way the copyright system works. They have done things a certain way for so long that they see no reason to change their methods. Even though there is a great need to reform and modify copyright law, the government stubbornly holds to their traditions.
There is a great need for logic, practicality, and common sense in government. So many aspects of copyright law just stand as barricades, retarding the progress of mankind. These things are not there for any specific purpose, only because tradition keeps them there. If there is ever something that impedes progress, it is critical to step back and examine the situation. We need to think about it. "Is that rule there for a good reason, or is it just getting in the way of people sharing ideas?" If both cases are true: "Is there any way we can change the rule to accommodate both features of the rule?" These are the questions that must be asked, responded to, and acted upon. You can never go wrong with common sense.

Pack Rats

This will be somewhat of an extension post of Brittany's lunch post about Chap. 14.

Could the MPAA be more of a selfish bitch? It is as if someone has taken every bit of revenue that might be generated from creative property, split it up into various increments, ranging from pennies to 1000 dollar bills, loaded it into a cannon and shot it into the air. When the money lands, the MPAA scrambles to collect the 1000 dollar bills, which is understandable. They pick up the 100 and 10 and 5 dollar bills from the streets and sidewalks. This is all fine. But they do not stop there. They dive into the sewers to collect every last penny that rolled through the storm grates. They hoard the dimes, nickels and pennies like pack rats. Not because of the value of these coins, but because they can. It’s their money, and they are going to hog it.

Lessig presents a very reasonable solution to this problem. His argument is extremely logical, which is what makes it so extremely unattractive to the MPAA and congress. Lessig proposes that if a copyright holder really wants to hold on to their copyright because it is worth something to them (default $1 as a reasonable minimum value), that they pay a $1 fee to keep the copyright. The reason for this is the many people get copyrights just to get copyrights. Or they get a copyright and forget that they even have it. These frivolous copyrights are serving no practical purpose. They are just impeding the content from going into the public domain so that it may be used for something useful. When someone wants to use content that is protected by some arcane copyright, they must necessarily track down the holder that may have changed addresses 18 times in the past month because they are wanted in 9 countries for murder. Someone like this would be particularly tricky to contact if you wanted to ask them if you could use their material.

Lessig’s proposal, called the Eldred Act, would eliminate this problem. Chances are that the serial killer who has been eschewed from society to some remote location in the Rocky Mountains is not going to pay that $1 fee. This is because that copyright is useless to him. It has been long forgotten. That copyright was just a product of some poetry fling he was on in 1969. After the serial killer does not pay the $1 fee, his work will then be released into the public domain to be used by anyone who wants to.

The bottom line is that the Eldred act is practical. The government and the MPAA are impractical. There is something that the human race thrives on called progress. Progress is the evolution of society, protocol, etiquette, language, government, technology, etc. to make our lives as human beings more pleasant. Progress is fueled by ideas. Something that is just as important as the ideas themselves is the ability to share them. There are certain formalities that are absolutely necessary to protect the rights of those who create things that are truly useful. Otherwise, anarchy would ensue. If an idea is beyond its prime age of profitability, however, it is critical that it be released to the public so that people can learn from the thing or idea. When people take the creations of other people and make improvements on them, this is when true progress results. Otherwise, inventors, creators and makers are forced to start from scratch, thereby necessarily reinventing the wheel every time they put pencil to paper.

To quote from Santos (forgive me if this is not 100% accurate): There are three kinds of people in the world. There is the stupid man, the smart man, and the wise man. The stupid man makes a mistake only to make the same mistake over and over again. The smart man makes a mistake, learns from the mistake, and never makes the same mistake again. The wise man sits back and watches the stupid man and the smart man make mistakes, learns from their mistakes, and thus never makes a mistake himself. Innovators of America are trying to be wise men. Current copyright law is putting blinders on the wise men. The wise men are thus unable to see and learn from the mistakes of their colleagues.
Copyright law is inhibiting progress.

Last Launch Post

It seems as though we covered this chapter quite a long time ago, but I was supposed to cover chapter 14-finish, so here it goes.
In chapter 14, Lessig's focus was talking further about the "Eldred Act". The main focus of this act is to prevent blockage of the spread of ideas. There are copyrights out there that are doing nothing but blocking access to knowledge. If one wants a longer term register to their work, then the person will pay $1. If it is not worth one dollar to this person, their work will become free domain to the public. Personally, I could not agree more with this act. Before reading this book, I never thought twice about the idea. However, with the threat of more and more of our freedom being taken away because of copyright laws, I've given the idea more thought. However, as we look further into the chapter, there are definitely people who disagree with this act. The MPAA disagreed because of a variety of reasons. They argued that the Congress rejected the idea of copyrights being renewed, they figured that the $1 fee may harm poor copyright holders, and they also argued that extending copyright terms would probably encourage restoration work. Some other worries included risks of copyrights to a story of a film being passed into the public, and that the existing law enables copyright owners to extent registration even if they wanted to. Throughout the chapter, Lessig goes on to talk about ways to deal with each of these worries, and in my opinion, is rather convincing.

Throughout the conclusion to this book {and throughout the entire book, nonetheless} Lessig portrays the fact that our copyright laws are not in the best interest of common sense. For example, he says that he agrees with supporting drug patents, but the fact that our government is stopping the flow of medications to Africa {for AIDS} because of patenting and cost, is ridiculous. People are going to look back on how our country has been acting in accordance to our copyright laws, and wonder how we could let such occurances happen. The United States has stopped the flow of knowledge in Africa, on how to develop drugs that could save 15 to 3o million lives. Bottom line: There should be balanced patent and copyright policies, and no one is doing anything about it. Not many people are aware of our present situation with intellectual property and copyright laws.

Later on in the book, Lessig talks about his idea with Creative Commons. However, since my post is getting a bit long, and since Daniele has covered this section in depth, I think that I will leave it at this.

Everyone have a great summer.

Grand Prix: How Much Is Too Much?

The Grand Prix tradition started on May 17, 1958. It was created because “students wanted a way for engineering students at Purdue to exercise their skills, knowledge, and enthusiasm.” The track that the race is held on was built in 1968. By the time the track was finished, we were into our 11th annual run. Next year will be the big 50 and I’m sure it will be a bigger and better celebration for some of us.

Being a Boilermaker in her first year of college, I got to hear about the fun festivities of Grand Prix; well most of them anyways. After I heard exactly what Grand Prix was about (from my view and what others have told me it’s a week long celebration where it’s expected that students sometimes come to class either drunk, hung-over, buzzed, or all of the above. On the last day of the festivities there is a race where go-kart type vehicles are raced around a track made specifically for Grand Prix. Teams consist of fraternities and independents) I have come to the conclusion that though going out every night and having fun with friends can be a great experience, some people don’t know where to draw the line. Being a friend to one of these “non-line drawers,” I have seen the effects it can do on someone. She frequently (ok…every night since Monday) has come home drunk and oh so proud of her state of being. I feel that while going out and drinking should be there to loosen you up and help to let go to have fun, it is not there for you to act like a fool in front of everyone you come across and be proud of it. She would (and sometimes still does) gloat and brag about how much she drank, what she drank, and that she spent the night with the “porcelain gods” on more than one occasion. How can someone have fun with friends and be responsible when they are passed out on the bathroom floor in god knows what and still think that it was the coolest thing that ever happened to them?

It’s great that she thought she had fun and I guess that’s what it’s all about: having fun and not caring what anyone else thinks, but there are consequences for all of the alcohol intake in a week. First of all, too much alcohol can lead to alcohol poisoning, which I still find amazing. I, personally, never drank until I came to college and I don’t regret any experiences I’ve had thus far, but to think that something that makes you feel good as well as tastes good could kill you in one night is astonishing. When I think of something killing you I automatically think of solid objects impacting our body in some sort of way and ending our life. Instead, this is a liquid that most college students consume on a weekend basis. Anyway, back to my study subject…she complains of being sick and not knowing why. Hmm? Why do you think? IT’S BECAUSE SHE IS ACTING LIKE AN IDIOT! She doesn’t give her body enough time to recuperate and “refocus” itself. Sure, go out the next night or whatever but don’t come and complain to my room mate and I that you’re sick and you don’t know why. And on top of all that, she’s majoring in nursing. I’m glad she’s having fun but just imagine what could of happened if she got stopped with her sober driver by the cops or the XI’s (non-Purude, non-Lafayette, non-West Lafayette cops who come in from surrounding areas and go undercover to help and get drunks off the street) since she is a minor and all.

I know a lot of this sounds like I’m just complaining but I want to make it announced that this is what in fact actually happens so some people and I know I’m not the only one who has experienced a situation like this. People need to know when to draw the line and still learn how to have fun all at the same time. I hope everyone had a fun and safe week because I know I did and am looking forward to next year when the big 50 comes.

Let the GAMES Begin. . .

Here is list of some top games (in my view). It is tough to think of every great game you have ever played. It's a little bit like accepting a great award - there are so many people that have helped you get where you are that you need to thank. You also know that if you leave anyone out, you will be a complete d-bag.

!. Goldeneye. This game revolutionized video games. There were some other decent games for N-64, but Goldeneye changed everything. The graphics (for their time) kicked. The clarity of the image was mind-blowing. The gameplay rocked. There is not a single game from its time that could compete with the amount of action and shooting that took place in Goldeneye. I cannot count the number of informal "Goldeneye Tournaments" I had with my friends. Goldeneye is the only game from its era that I would still play on a regular basis (if I still had an N-64).

@. AB game. Some people may have not heard of this game by this title before, but it is truly great. It is a game that was absolutely not invented by me or any of my friends (I'm sure it was invented long ago), but my friends and I sort of stumbled upon this game by accident. (Countless hours on the bus, driving to our high school band tour destination forces some creative means of entertainment.) The AB game goes like this. . . You think of two of the most disgusting or terrible situations that are physically possible to present to the contestant(s). The contestant is naturally not going to want to do either of the situations, but they must choose one. The person doesn't actually do it, of course. These are all hypothetical situations. You take turns going around your circle of friends thinking of terrible situations, and presenting the rest of the group with the choice: scenario A or scenario B? This is the ultimate game of indecision. It's like being forced to choose between eating goose crap or moose crap. You don't want to eat either, but which would you eat if you had to? (The scenarios you usually come up with are far worse than eating any kind of crap. The scenarios often involve sexual activities with disgusting people. . . but we won't get into that.)

#. Duck Hunt. I have to admit that this was not originally on my list, but when someone else suggested it, I had to put it on my list. There is not much that needs to be said for this game. It was for the original NES (Nintendo Entertainment System). You shoot ducks that fly up on the screen with a gun that you hold in your hand. For the NES, this game is just pretty darn fun. (Plus there was that stupid dog that laughed at you when you let the birds get away. It just pissed you off and made want to shoot the dog. But they wouldn't let you. How frustrating.) Additionaly, the musical jingles were fantastic. They are simply indescribable; you just have to hear them. If Duck Hunt had a soundtrack. . . I would buy it.

$. Grand Theft Auto. Whether we are talking about the games made for original Playstation (which had unnecessarily bad graphics, which made it even more fun.) or the ones for PS2 - it doesn't matter. They are all fun for one reason. You can do whatever you want (namely going on mass murdering sprees). This is no joke. You can do WHATEVER you want. You can even do it with a hooker in the back of your car (GTA3). If you want to do the missions you can. If you want to drive around in an ice cream truck running people over and shooting them with an M-16 - you can. The possibilities are limitless.

%. Dodgeball. You throw balls at each other.

As for what great means: Great in the context of this blog means that it has provided me with much pleasure and entertainment. More so that anything else.

Our Culture

In my opinion, Lessig’s book is a very useful book to understand the concept of intellectual property through the way of historical examples. It was astonishing to learn about the reality of how Disney’s Mickey Mouse came to be, how ridiculous the US government can be, how blogs have taken the world collective ideas to the next level, and many other examples that made their way and became part of our culture, but Lessig's way of explaining his examples seamed kind of repetitive. The examples were different but the idea behind it was all the same. Lessig finds it in his book to discuss intellectual property in regards to a collective culture from all possible angles.

Close to being informative, Free Culture has expands the view of how intellectual property affects us in everyday life. It is everywhere; there is no running or escaping it. It is in our hands, in our home, our computer, our car, the foods we eat, the tools we use, the things we wear. Ergo, we cannot escape the bowels of our own culture.

The End of the Beginning

We are done with Lessig. However, we have been discussing intellectual property for over three months now. As we all know intellectual property exists in many forms, but it is becoming less and less accessible for us as it gets more and more expensive. Every one of us has a choice of going with it or going against it. Most people in the class could have been able to associate themselves with every presentation that was made in class. Education is always the beginning, now it is the time to use that education. This three month conversation was made to educate all of us. It is hard to decide whether this is the right time and the right place for us to join the world discussion, but it is easy to see that we are not late take part in it. This is like any political election, except every term is every time Congress passes out a new copyright law, or when there is a law suit concerning someone’s intellectual property. Whether we want to or not, we have entered the Parlor.

Greatest = Best

1. CHESS, So many years have passed people still play it and it is one of the few games that i haven't beaten yet...
2. Fencing, (Physical Chess) Don't let the modern name confuse you, it maybe perhaps the oldest game of all time.
3. Football(Soccer) There is a reason the whole world and I love it...
4. Bridge, at least one card game has to be here, cards have exsited for a long time and entertained people during the worst times.
5. Tetris makes you think and it is the only computer game that I play that is older than 3 years "race-against-machine-to-inevitable-death-game" - Santos

Just Gaming...

"What are the five greatest games of all time?"

My list (in no specific order):

1. Bridge [mother of all card games]

2. Pac-Man [first big "race-against-machine-to-inevitable-death-game"]

3. Hide n Go Seek [anyone never play this game?]

4. Madden Football [I'd probably have to ditch this one for chess...]

5. Cricket [baseball's better, but cricket came first!]

My list is not definitive, as I already said, I would have to get chess up there and am not in love with cricket.

Also, I interpreted "greatest" as "influential, important."

Responses? Let the persuasion begin...