Friday, June 01, 2007
(Apologies for the font weirdness and other stuff; it's the result of lots of cutting and pasting, as well as Blogger's wonky WYSIWYG editor).
This is the home stretch, the wrap-up, followed by David Weinberger's keynote (the one I'm most excited about).
While waiting for everyone to get seated (we're twelve minutes behind), I'll talk about the late-afternoon snacks, which included granola bars, fruit, and more coffee. The last is the important one.
One weird annoyance: the feedback forms are paper-only. To quote my much-more-prudish-than-me daughter, What the Hamster? For those of us with awful handwriting (and a likely precursor to arthritis that makes writing ten paragraphs of responses painful), web surveys are a blessing. And at a tech conference, why not have it online, where it can easily be analyzed and shared?
Anyway, Karim Lakhani is handing the wrapup:
Wikipedia on VA Tech shootings serving as a clearinghouse for info: Knowledge Beyond Authority.
University: Producers of Knowledge, Consumer of Knowledge, Repository of Knowledge, Transmitters of Knowledge. But Internet blurs producers, consumers, storage, transmission.
University has monopoly over certifying knowledge workers, structure of authority over the knowledge.
De facto, Knowledge Beyond Authority is a challenge to the university (my editorial addition: Only to those universities that put all their eggs in the knowledge certification basket -- the universities that will thrive are the ones that share knowledge and work to make the world better as a whole).
(ETA: Someone in the audience notes that it should be "Knowledge Expands Authority," and that universities need to recognize that or fall behind. David Weinberger just agreed that PhDs don't prove anything. Shades of Heinlein's Number of the Beast.)
Lakhani is now looking for issues from the "how to deal with the RIAA" workshop. Apparently there was a lot of contention there. What a shock. :-) Most seem to stand against the university as police. Some counter-claims note that universities do hold responsibilities when it comes to teaching ethics
One audience member: "Primary goal of guilds is to exclude." Notes that at the extreme (medical degrees) those without degrees who profess knowledge can go to jail. The Academy, as a whole, is practicing a form of protectionism here.
Lakhani seems to be on the same page, simply noting that it'll take small steps for Harvard (whereas MIT takes big steps -- difference in culture).
Lakhani was at MIT during Opencourseware launch. Backstory: Harvard and others were offering course info online to make money, and MIT was late to the game. MIT saw a potential "hack" to the system in simply giving it away for free, thus undercutting Harvard and others. There are more than 150 schools now developing opencourseware, but only 12 or so in the US. One barrier (noted by a UMASS-Boston guy) is that cash-strapped universities need to sell their online courses, and can't afford the investment involved in opencourseware (the educational equivelent of "you've got to have money to make money.").
Someone notes that OpenCourseware is just another form of publishing (sharing knowledge with the world). But that requires universities to accept it as such.
Workshop summaries: Hunger for change is the major theme:
Policy-level change:
Broader University Mission
Access to Knowledge
Copyright to Copyleft
Clarity on Policy
Who is Responsible?
Public/Private/Non-Profit
Technological Changes
Open up infrastructure
Standardization of data
Build and use tech to achieve goals
KBA?
Leaky Technologies
(all of the tech changes stuff above has simply been posted on the projector, without any comment or explanation).
(Lots of this stuff plays into the semantic web).
"Libraries are infrastructure for R&D and knowledge."
Economic Changes
Business Models for Universities
Business Models for Companies
Emergence of hybrid Forms
Who pays?
Is there a free lunch.
"Who Pays" is the big one, of course (Wikipedia keeps seeking donations, etc). See, though, the idea that OpenCourseware has only enhanced MIT's reputation and success.
One note -- Wikipedia gets the donations from their readers. And other projects are also driven by demand -- folks are willing to give small amounts of money and large amounts of time to projects they support.
Social Changes
How to distribute knowledge and authority?
Expertise vs broad participation
Top-down vs bottom-up social systems
Cash between digital natives, immigrants, and luddites.
Personally, I want to see this last one represented in a Starcraft-like setting. The Protoss could be the digital natives, the Terrans the digital immigrants, and the Zerg are clearly the luddites.
Time for the final event: the closing keynote!
David's speaking now, and is engaging as always.
Key points:
Idea of knowledge is out of whack with how knowledge actually works (again, PhD is an example, as the best and brightest often lack degrees). Authorities never did have authority, from a knowledge point of view.
Other assumptions:
"Belief is a mental state"
There is no plural for "knowledge." And the state of it is binary (if something is true, all else much be false)
Gatekeepers of knowledge (publishers, universities) deserve to be gatekeepers.
Real world (a book is an object, it cannot exist in two places, etc) has artificially set our limitations on knowledge. We need to recognize that knowledge doesn't have these limitations (online storage, etc).
"Knowledge is conversational"
(Example: Listservs, wikipedia*, etc -- users earn authoritative currency by demonstrating authority, regardless of credentials) Knowledge is in the shared conversation, not the individuals who share it.
Knowledge is important as potential -- more important to get a post out there, which will then let others correct it, modify it, dispute it, etc. Getting it out there and getting it linked are what matter. An inaccurate post that gets corrected and dissected and read and linked has properly increased the overall base knowledge.
"Authority becomes metadata"
Still need to reduce size of metadata -- if you make the card catalog as big as the book, its not accomplishing much. Same concept applies online.
Looking forward: Important to be unrealistic every one in a while. We're at a crossroads on the web (politically), but the University is the bastion of openness, and the web is capable of serving as the tool of openness that Universities employ. Universities need to be the driving force here, and we need to be optimists about the state of things.
Time to head out. Great closing speech, and damned useful conference!
*He explicitly said that he's sick of using Wikipedia as an example, but it's still the obvious one.
is2k7
This is the home stretch, the wrap-up, followed by David Weinberger's keynote (the one I'm most excited about).
While waiting for everyone to get seated (we're twelve minutes behind), I'll talk about the late-afternoon snacks, which included granola bars, fruit, and more coffee. The last is the important one.
One weird annoyance: the feedback forms are paper-only. To quote my much-more-prudish-than-me daughter, What the Hamster? For those of us with awful handwriting (and a likely precursor to arthritis that makes writing ten paragraphs of responses painful), web surveys are a blessing. And at a tech conference, why not have it online, where it can easily be analyzed and shared?
Anyway, Karim Lakhani is handing the wrapup:
Wikipedia on VA Tech shootings serving as a clearinghouse for info: Knowledge Beyond Authority.
University: Producers of Knowledge, Consumer of Knowledge, Repository of Knowledge, Transmitters of Knowledge. But Internet blurs producers, consumers, storage, transmission.
University has monopoly over certifying knowledge workers, structure of authority over the knowledge.
De facto, Knowledge Beyond Authority is a challenge to the university (my editorial addition: Only to those universities that put all their eggs in the knowledge certification basket -- the universities that will thrive are the ones that share knowledge and work to make the world better as a whole).
(ETA: Someone in the audience notes that it should be "Knowledge Expands Authority," and that universities need to recognize that or fall behind. David Weinberger just agreed that PhDs don't prove anything. Shades of Heinlein's Number of the Beast.)
Lakhani is now looking for issues from the "how to deal with the RIAA" workshop. Apparently there was a lot of contention there. What a shock. :-) Most seem to stand against the university as police. Some counter-claims note that universities do hold responsibilities when it comes to teaching ethics
One audience member: "Primary goal of guilds is to exclude." Notes that at the extreme (medical degrees) those without degrees who profess knowledge can go to jail. The Academy, as a whole, is practicing a form of protectionism here.
Lakhani seems to be on the same page, simply noting that it'll take small steps for Harvard (whereas MIT takes big steps -- difference in culture).
Lakhani was at MIT during Opencourseware launch. Backstory: Harvard and others were offering course info online to make money, and MIT was late to the game. MIT saw a potential "hack" to the system in simply giving it away for free, thus undercutting Harvard and others. There are more than 150 schools now developing opencourseware, but only 12 or so in the US. One barrier (noted by a UMASS-Boston guy) is that cash-strapped universities need to sell their online courses, and can't afford the investment involved in opencourseware (the educational equivelent of "you've got to have money to make money.").
Someone notes that OpenCourseware is just another form of publishing (sharing knowledge with the world). But that requires universities to accept it as such.
Workshop summaries: Hunger for change is the major theme:
Policy-level change:
Broader University Mission
Access to Knowledge
Copyright to Copyleft
Clarity on Policy
Who is Responsible?
Public/Private/Non-Profit
Technological Changes
Open up infrastructure
Standardization of data
Build and use tech to achieve goals
KBA?
Leaky Technologies
(all of the tech changes stuff above has simply been posted on the projector, without any comment or explanation).
(Lots of this stuff plays into the semantic web).
"Libraries are infrastructure for R&D and knowledge."
Economic Changes
Business Models for Universities
Business Models for Companies
Emergence of hybrid Forms
Who pays?
Is there a free lunch.
"Who Pays" is the big one, of course (Wikipedia keeps seeking donations, etc). See, though, the idea that OpenCourseware has only enhanced MIT's reputation and success.
One note -- Wikipedia gets the donations from their readers. And other projects are also driven by demand -- folks are willing to give small amounts of money and large amounts of time to projects they support.
Social Changes
How to distribute knowledge and authority?
Expertise vs broad participation
Top-down vs bottom-up social systems
Cash between digital natives, immigrants, and luddites.
Personally, I want to see this last one represented in a Starcraft-like setting. The Protoss could be the digital natives, the Terrans the digital immigrants, and the Zerg are clearly the luddites.
Time for the final event: the closing keynote!
David's speaking now, and is engaging as always.
Key points:
Idea of knowledge is out of whack with how knowledge actually works (again, PhD is an example, as the best and brightest often lack degrees). Authorities never did have authority, from a knowledge point of view.
Other assumptions:
"Belief is a mental state"
There is no plural for "knowledge." And the state of it is binary (if something is true, all else much be false)
Gatekeepers of knowledge (publishers, universities) deserve to be gatekeepers.
Real world (a book is an object, it cannot exist in two places, etc) has artificially set our limitations on knowledge. We need to recognize that knowledge doesn't have these limitations (online storage, etc).
"Knowledge is conversational"
(Example: Listservs, wikipedia*, etc -- users earn authoritative currency by demonstrating authority, regardless of credentials) Knowledge is in the shared conversation, not the individuals who share it.
Knowledge is important as potential -- more important to get a post out there, which will then let others correct it, modify it, dispute it, etc. Getting it out there and getting it linked are what matter. An inaccurate post that gets corrected and dissected and read and linked has properly increased the overall base knowledge.
"Authority becomes metadata"
Still need to reduce size of metadata -- if you make the card catalog as big as the book, its not accomplishing much. Same concept applies online.
Looking forward: Important to be unrealistic every one in a while. We're at a crossroads on the web (politically), but the University is the bastion of openness, and the web is capable of serving as the tool of openness that Universities employ. Universities need to be the driving force here, and we need to be optimists about the state of things.
Time to head out. Great closing speech, and damned useful conference!
*He explicitly said that he's sick of using Wikipedia as an example, but it's still the obvious one.
is2k7Labels: IS2k7
I'm at the second (and final) breakout session, The Digital Identity of UNIVERSITY.
This one will be focusing on norms that have developed in online communities. It's lead by a Facebook guy (because the software originated at Harvard, of course), although not the Facebook guy who called me and my entire generation "morons." Which is too bad. Also leading this are John Clippinger from the Berkman Center and Anthony Ciolli from Autoadmit.com.
We're starting with the Facebook presentation, which is very tradeshowish and oversimplistic so far..
While we're getting told stuff we already know, I should mention that the box lunch was a roast beef rollup, with chips and fruit. Plus Diet Coke, which is what matters.
Nothing interesting in the Facebook presentation, but this video was pretty cute.
Ciolli is noting the more significant issues, that applications to grad schools and to jobs are affected by internet identify (facebook and myspace profiles, etc). The questions raised are A) should colleges warn and train users in the nature (and worries associated with) maintaining a digital identity? and B) should colleges and grad schools take digital identity into account when considering applicants?
Back to Facebook, the question now is the nature of authentication. The big problem (as always) is the end-user, but Facebook has done a great job of essentially letting the universities be the authentication systems for them, requiring, say, an emory.edu email address to get to the Emory facebook communities. Its a brilliant (and underappreciated) aspect of Facebook's structure.
Discussion now on how blogger and authenticated identities work. Talk of political dissenters in other countries who couldn't authenticate (for fear of reprisals), but essentially authenticate with the quality of their information.
Facebook -no age based search, but under-18s are kept away from rest of communities.
Gah! Facebook guy (whose name is actually Chris Kelly) just mentioned for the third time that "Facebook is the 6th-most trafficked website in the United States." Take a drink!
More talks about the need for end users to leverage the privacy policies (and how too few of them do, leaving their profiles viewable to parents, employers, etc). Students need to remember that, for example, their RA is a student too, and that making a photo that could be incriminating "friends only" is a smart idea.
Worth noting: Facebook won't provide info to schools without a subpoena.
The flip side of digital identity -- that schools themselves have digital identity. Harvard LAw School admissions is a perfect example, with their own admissions blog. Other schools let students blog (under the official university aegis), have the usual RSS feeds and other stuff.
Nice jab by Kelly -- the only reason Facebook exists is that Harvard didn't do a good enough job of establishing a digital identity in a timely and effective manner.
Extrapolating, of course, the idea is that universities in general have been too slow to really adopt new ideas. And many of these services simply can't be offered through the university, because they transcend it, or because of privacy requirements (FERPA, etc).
(Aside: http://harvard.lonespot.org/# -- startup social calendering app for universities, still with a Harvard focus).
Facebook is now positioning itself as a "platform," essentially looking at it like iGoogle, etc.
Rep from Social Science Research Network is talking on distrubution of full-text downloads (millions per year). Downloads currently serve as the initial vetting process, which in turn leads to the refereeing process (without substituting for it). Has been enhanced by blogger links. Notes the need for both recommender and referee systems.
SSRN getting used as an early indicator of how tech-savvy a professor is. Also notes that some schools are pointing to SSRN instead of posting papers locally.
SSRN can get immediate count on downloads, but citations take more time.
People are finally talking about the two big and conflicting identity issues: The need to merge and manage identities, and the need to keep identities separate, and to hide aspects of one's digital identity from others.
(Aside -- Internationally, locking down the internet poses a serious human rights concern. One otherwise very nice guy, however, has spent the last fifteen minutes noting this, which wouldn't be a bad thing if it weren't completely tangental to the rest of the discussion)
Saving and posting this now, as we're about halfway through the session. More to come.
Someone has finally noted that authentication is not the same as violating privacy.
Flipside: It's possible to provide "security" and violate privacy (using ssl certs).
Back to digital uni identities -- Opencourseware gives back to the greater community while still helping university.
Second largest facebook group at Brown is Brown Class of 2011 (next year's freshmen).
"Digital Native" is constantly evolving; each year is more "native," and when enough natives are in academia, culture will shift.
I just noted that it's not the responsibility of the university to disclose that they'll search facebook/google for somebody; it's the responsibly of the university (and the high schools) to teach what a digital identity represents, and prepare students for the fact that they'll be searched on google.
Good point by the person across the aisle -- high schools need to move away from policing social sites and towards partnering with colleges on how social sites can become a part of the pedagogy.
Oops -- we ended up running past our time (we were all too engaged -- what a tragedy!). Off to the summation session.
(Edited to fix Anthony Ciollli's name)
is2k7
This one will be focusing on norms that have developed in online communities. It's lead by a Facebook guy (because the software originated at Harvard, of course), although not the Facebook guy who called me and my entire generation "morons." Which is too bad. Also leading this are John Clippinger from the Berkman Center and Anthony Ciolli from Autoadmit.com.
We're starting with the Facebook presentation, which is very tradeshowish and oversimplistic so far..
While we're getting told stuff we already know, I should mention that the box lunch was a roast beef rollup, with chips and fruit. Plus Diet Coke, which is what matters.
Nothing interesting in the Facebook presentation, but this video was pretty cute.
Ciolli is noting the more significant issues, that applications to grad schools and to jobs are affected by internet identify (facebook and myspace profiles, etc). The questions raised are A) should colleges warn and train users in the nature (and worries associated with) maintaining a digital identity? and B) should colleges and grad schools take digital identity into account when considering applicants?
Back to Facebook, the question now is the nature of authentication. The big problem (as always) is the end-user, but Facebook has done a great job of essentially letting the universities be the authentication systems for them, requiring, say, an emory.edu email address to get to the Emory facebook communities. Its a brilliant (and underappreciated) aspect of Facebook's structure.
Discussion now on how blogger and authenticated identities work. Talk of political dissenters in other countries who couldn't authenticate (for fear of reprisals), but essentially authenticate with the quality of their information.
Facebook -no age based search, but under-18s are kept away from rest of communities.
Gah! Facebook guy (whose name is actually Chris Kelly) just mentioned for the third time that "Facebook is the 6th-most trafficked website in the United States." Take a drink!
More talks about the need for end users to leverage the privacy policies (and how too few of them do, leaving their profiles viewable to parents, employers, etc). Students need to remember that, for example, their RA is a student too, and that making a photo that could be incriminating "friends only" is a smart idea.
Worth noting: Facebook won't provide info to schools without a subpoena.
The flip side of digital identity -- that schools themselves have digital identity. Harvard LAw School admissions is a perfect example, with their own admissions blog. Other schools let students blog (under the official university aegis), have the usual RSS feeds and other stuff.
Nice jab by Kelly -- the only reason Facebook exists is that Harvard didn't do a good enough job of establishing a digital identity in a timely and effective manner.
Extrapolating, of course, the idea is that universities in general have been too slow to really adopt new ideas. And many of these services simply can't be offered through the university, because they transcend it, or because of privacy requirements (FERPA, etc).
(Aside: http://harvard.lonespot.org/# -- startup social calendering app for universities, still with a Harvard focus).
Facebook is now positioning itself as a "platform," essentially looking at it like iGoogle, etc.
Rep from Social Science Research Network is talking on distrubution of full-text downloads (millions per year). Downloads currently serve as the initial vetting process, which in turn leads to the refereeing process (without substituting for it). Has been enhanced by blogger links. Notes the need for both recommender and referee systems.
SSRN getting used as an early indicator of how tech-savvy a professor is. Also notes that some schools are pointing to SSRN instead of posting papers locally.
SSRN can get immediate count on downloads, but citations take more time.
People are finally talking about the two big and conflicting identity issues: The need to merge and manage identities, and the need to keep identities separate, and to hide aspects of one's digital identity from others.
(Aside -- Internationally, locking down the internet poses a serious human rights concern. One otherwise very nice guy, however, has spent the last fifteen minutes noting this, which wouldn't be a bad thing if it weren't completely tangental to the rest of the discussion)
Saving and posting this now, as we're about halfway through the session. More to come.
Someone has finally noted that authentication is not the same as violating privacy.
Flipside: It's possible to provide "security" and violate privacy (using ssl certs).
Back to digital uni identities -- Opencourseware gives back to the greater community while still helping university.
Second largest facebook group at Brown is Brown Class of 2011 (next year's freshmen).
"Digital Native" is constantly evolving; each year is more "native," and when enough natives are in academia, culture will shift.
I just noted that it's not the responsibility of the university to disclose that they'll search facebook/google for somebody; it's the responsibly of the university (and the high schools) to teach what a digital identity represents, and prepare students for the fact that they'll be searched on google.
Good point by the person across the aisle -- high schools need to move away from policing social sites and towards partnering with colleges on how social sites can become a part of the pedagogy.
Oops -- we ended up running past our time (we were all too engaged -- what a tragedy!). Off to the summation session.
(Edited to fix Anthony Ciollli's name)
is2k7Labels: IS2k7
I've decided to start a new post for the breakout sessions. I'm at the Agenda for Fair Use session right now (and my colleague Dave is at the University and the Library session, so I might update with anything he discovers there later).
Introductions:
This room is packed (likely because one of the other breakout sessions was canceled, as well as the fact). Great variety of folks here -- faculty members, writers, artists, lawyers, corporate folks (the chief privacy officer of Facebook, an NBC/Universal officer, the gen council for Sundance Channel, etc), others (someone from the Chilling Effects Clearninghouse, etc.). Nice range of stakeholders here as well. Interestingly, only one person actively identified themselves as a blogger. I suspect that there are quite a few more here.
(And, in fairness, since this is about Fair Use in the context of University, I think most folks presented their credentials in the academic context).
Background:
Documentary filmmakers on copyright (pdf here). These are both copyright owners and folks who can benefit by fair use of other people's work, therefore they were forced to make some tough choices. "Clearance Culture" -- the need to clear everything they film (a family sings "Happy birthday" on film spontaneously; should that require clearance?). What about when using clips as a critique (criticizing Fox news, or showing newspaper headlines)? Most feel that these are okay, and used these to set best practices for fair use.
(An Aside: As always, all Fair Use and Best Practices discussions are inherently crippled by the lack of solid legal definitions and any case law). Statement of Best Practices, however, has been accepted by PBS, IFC, and HBO. Insurers are baffled by Fair Use, but can use the Statement of Best Practices to help vet these items.
None of the films made has been challenged (showing strength of the best practice); the guy who made "This Film is Not Yet Rated" was hoping for at least one Cease-and-Desist letter to put on the DVD. :-)
Alex Kozinsky was just mentioned as being very in favor of this.
Breaking this model out to academia: Teachers, librarians, media literacy practitioners, etc. can work to try to build practice models along these lines.
Reminder: Fair use is often used by pirates and others to rationalize copying entire books, sharing movies, etc. Full use does not apply.
New issue is the architecture: showing a movie in the classroom vs streaming it online.
Good point: Does DMCA trump fair use by criminalizing the act of accessing the data?
(My take: Yes, and that's one more reason that the DMCA needs to be dumped)
(Aside: MIT OpenCourseware isn't working with fair use, so no pop culture courses are online)
(time for small-group discussions. More later.)
Discussion group notes:
(Concerns and questions brought up by each six-person group)
1. Concern: Leaking of proper fair use material (video clip in a course, then stolen and shared by a student). Where does the responsibility to protect this lie?
2. Legal Council clamping down on student file sharing. Puts responsibility on students and faculty to set permissions.
3. Rights of creators and obligations creators have to society as a whole (Use Creative Commons, Free Software Foundation).
4. Difference between in-class and out-of-class use of copyright-protected material.
5. "How do you define wall?" When referring to lack of copyright violations within walls of classroom.
6. Tech creep: Licenses and laws might make it okay to share on a current cell phone network, but not a future one.
7. Tech Creep 2: Record an episode of Nova and show in the classroom: Fine. Digitize an episode of Nova, students watch it online. What if they share it?
8. Pressure to put stuff online (from schools, also peer and student-driven pressure).
9. Need to educate faculty about what is actually fair use.
10. Unwillingness by some students to accept distinction between what's educational/fair use and what's not.
11. Limited license issues. Software or other stuff taken beyond the limit of what a copyright holder has authorized.
(Aside: I only just noticed that this classroom, which has plugs for laptops built into every table and a very strong wireless signal also has an old-fashioned chalk-based blackboard instead of a whiteboard or a smart board).
12. When does TEACH act apply?
13. Limitations of Creative Commons licenses for what one group wanted to do (the "no deriv work" restriction -- does fair use still trump it?). Flip-side: What's the value of specifying "zones of safe harbor" using CC or other license (which thus also explicitly bans other uses).
14. Does (should) the shift in platform (internet vs classroom) change fair use, copyright, etc?
Final notes:
"It's Educational" does not mean "Fair Use." Period. NO presumption of fair use for education. But copyright law does tend to give more latitude to transformative uses, but much of educational use is verbatim.
Follow-up -- need to codify educational and fair use. How can we do it? Copyright cannot solve for social inequality.
Good faith efforts in education do prevent statutory damages (but are hard to define).
It's not how copyright law can protect, it's how we can protect information and media from copyright law. GPL, CC both are aiming to this.
Lots more copyright thoughts that I'll be writing up later. First session is over. Lunchtime!
is2k7
Introductions:
This room is packed (likely because one of the other breakout sessions was canceled, as well as the fact). Great variety of folks here -- faculty members, writers, artists, lawyers, corporate folks (the chief privacy officer of Facebook, an NBC/Universal officer, the gen council for Sundance Channel, etc), others (someone from the Chilling Effects Clearninghouse, etc.). Nice range of stakeholders here as well. Interestingly, only one person actively identified themselves as a blogger. I suspect that there are quite a few more here.
(And, in fairness, since this is about Fair Use in the context of University, I think most folks presented their credentials in the academic context).
Background:
Documentary filmmakers on copyright (pdf here). These are both copyright owners and folks who can benefit by fair use of other people's work, therefore they were forced to make some tough choices. "Clearance Culture" -- the need to clear everything they film (a family sings "Happy birthday" on film spontaneously; should that require clearance?). What about when using clips as a critique (criticizing Fox news, or showing newspaper headlines)? Most feel that these are okay, and used these to set best practices for fair use.
(An Aside: As always, all Fair Use and Best Practices discussions are inherently crippled by the lack of solid legal definitions and any case law). Statement of Best Practices, however, has been accepted by PBS, IFC, and HBO. Insurers are baffled by Fair Use, but can use the Statement of Best Practices to help vet these items.
None of the films made has been challenged (showing strength of the best practice); the guy who made "This Film is Not Yet Rated" was hoping for at least one Cease-and-Desist letter to put on the DVD. :-)
Alex Kozinsky was just mentioned as being very in favor of this.
Breaking this model out to academia: Teachers, librarians, media literacy practitioners, etc. can work to try to build practice models along these lines.
Reminder: Fair use is often used by pirates and others to rationalize copying entire books, sharing movies, etc. Full use does not apply.
New issue is the architecture: showing a movie in the classroom vs streaming it online.
Good point: Does DMCA trump fair use by criminalizing the act of accessing the data?
(My take: Yes, and that's one more reason that the DMCA needs to be dumped)
(Aside: MIT OpenCourseware isn't working with fair use, so no pop culture courses are online)
(time for small-group discussions. More later.)
Discussion group notes:
(Concerns and questions brought up by each six-person group)
1. Concern: Leaking of proper fair use material (video clip in a course, then stolen and shared by a student). Where does the responsibility to protect this lie?
2. Legal Council clamping down on student file sharing. Puts responsibility on students and faculty to set permissions.
3. Rights of creators and obligations creators have to society as a whole (Use Creative Commons, Free Software Foundation).
4. Difference between in-class and out-of-class use of copyright-protected material.
5. "How do you define wall?" When referring to lack of copyright violations within walls of classroom.
6. Tech creep: Licenses and laws might make it okay to share on a current cell phone network, but not a future one.
7. Tech Creep 2: Record an episode of Nova and show in the classroom: Fine. Digitize an episode of Nova, students watch it online. What if they share it?
8. Pressure to put stuff online (from schools, also peer and student-driven pressure).
9. Need to educate faculty about what is actually fair use.
10. Unwillingness by some students to accept distinction between what's educational/fair use and what's not.
11. Limited license issues. Software or other stuff taken beyond the limit of what a copyright holder has authorized.
(Aside: I only just noticed that this classroom, which has plugs for laptops built into every table and a very strong wireless signal also has an old-fashioned chalk-based blackboard instead of a whiteboard or a smart board).
12. When does TEACH act apply?
13. Limitations of Creative Commons licenses for what one group wanted to do (the "no deriv work" restriction -- does fair use still trump it?). Flip-side: What's the value of specifying "zones of safe harbor" using CC or other license (which thus also explicitly bans other uses).
14. Does (should) the shift in platform (internet vs classroom) change fair use, copyright, etc?
Final notes:
"It's Educational" does not mean "Fair Use." Period. NO presumption of fair use for education. But copyright law does tend to give more latitude to transformative uses, but much of educational use is verbatim.
Follow-up -- need to codify educational and fair use. How can we do it? Copyright cannot solve for social inequality.
Good faith efforts in education do prevent statutory damages (but are hard to define).
It's not how copyright law can protect, it's how we can protect information and media from copyright law. GPL, CC both are aiming to this.
Lots more copyright thoughts that I'll be writing up later. First session is over. Lunchtime!
is2k7Labels: IS2k7
IS2K7
I'm at the Internet and Society 2007 Conference today, and will be liveblogging anything of interest, with edits to this post as things come up. Most of what I'm writing is stuff that stands out as being of interest to me; apologies ahead of time if my notes are disjointed; I'll attempt to organize things more efficiently later.
Registration/pre-conference notes:
1. I'd forgotten just how big Harvard is. Fortunately, finding the Law School was not a problem.
2. Alas, the food court next door does not take credit cards. How is Harvard so far behind Emory and Brandeis?
3. Registration was painless. Just grabbed my badge, my info packet, and my complimentary deck of Berkman Center playing cards. There's copious amounts of free (and mediocre) coffee, as well as assorted tiny pastries.
4. There's also free wireless (of course), a Realplayer stream, a Second Life presence, an irc channel, and other virtual presences. Stuff all conferences should have.
5. The Mac/PC ratio here is about 7:1. Thats the sign of a conference filled with intelligent people. :-)
Introductions
1. Charles Nesson was unable to make it, as he needed emergency surgery. He's supposed to join us virtually at some point later, post-surgery, once he's coherent enough to type with at least one finger. That's heroism. :-)
2. Charles Ogletree, of the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice, is speaking now. Speaking towards the nature of citizenship and individuals in society. Good speech, going over the history of the conference
3. Nesson pre-prepared audio speech. He assures us that the medical situation is nothing serious (thankfully). Key question: What are the concerns and responsibilities of the university in relation to society, individuals, corporations, and others?
4. Professor Mary Wong (specializing in intellectual law), speaking on yesterday's pre-conference events. 80+ folks met last night discussing the theme of "University as Client."
- University goal #1: Utilitarian, provide training.
- University goal #2: Expose and explore difficult issues, better society
(The latter, of course, is what I think most of us hope for universities for strive for).
- Commericialzation. Licensing in and licensing out (Fetch comes to mind, as does scientific research).
-Intellectual Property, copyright ownership are focus of debates.
-Fair Use. Vagueness is a perpetual problem. Can all stakeholders be made happy?
- Should university act as IP enforcer? There wasn't any consensus on this one, not suprisingly (although I come down firmly on the "no" side).
-Ideal licensing? Can we improve the current situation.
(Of note, Ames Courtroom is nearly full by this point. Good to see this level of attendance.)
Keynote: John Palfrey (exec director of Berkman Center)
1. Born Digital (title of speech).
(Note: I'm assuming that Palfrey's presentation will be available online, and I'll link to it later).
A. Perspective of students. Difference between being born digital vs learning to be digital. Four major attributes of natives:
-Digital identities
Facebook, myspace, Second Life, etc.
-Multi-tasking
students with laptops, etc. Changes how they take classes, interact in real life.
-Digital Media
digital cameras, flickr, youtube, blogs, etc. Google/Wikipedia equals "research" to many.
-Consumers to creators
Feedback loop for processing information. Second Life, RSS, Wikipedia. "Semiotic Democracy."
New Media Literacies -- challenges:
The Participation Gap (classic Digital Divide).
Ethics.
Transparency.
B. Teachers.
Can Digital immigrants be reborn (and should we?) Second Life avatars.
New Networks: Facebook. All students have it before they even come to college. Should Faculty have Facebook accounts? Is your teacher your "Friend" (to use Facebook/LJ terminology)? Should he or she be?
Emergent Tools -- Should wikis and other tools supplant traditional tools like the Socratic Method (and what sort of happy medium can be achieved?).
Digital Identity -- learners and information are born digital. Therefore, "How does University understand its own emerging digital identity?"
Currently, information might start digital, and gets transferred to newsprint or other formats, as opposed to being born on paper as in previous generations.
Public Library of Science.
Open Access. If we bridge the digial divide, how does that affect digital community. OpenNet Initiative. How does that affect University as a whole?
Cathedral to Bazaar. Virtual "ID required" card stopping access to digital learning. Science commons, Scratch, OpenCourseware as alternatives. Harvard (and University as a whole) needs an answer to OpenCourseware.
Hard Questions. Questions asked pre-conference can be found here. A few big ones:
(University/Corporations. Google, MPAA, RIAA, Reed Elsevier, Second Life, Blackboard, etc. )What relationship should exist between University and corporations? Should university deliver pre-litigation letters (hell no!).
What is the best way to invest in libraries in a digital age? This includes physical spaces as well as subscription services. Is it proper to invest in access to digital subscriptions, when they could go away?
(Aside: The guy next to me is staring at LOL Cats images)
How do we fund and sustain a generation of digital knowledge (related to the previous two questions)?
YALSA. Literacy and social networks: How does the new generation of library scientists learn? Wikipedia, of course.
What is the impact of an outdated copyright system? The current system is simply not capable of handling today's technology and the University. See Fair Use, CCC, RIAA, etc. Should University take a leadership role to change the system?
Notable figures and knowledge:
Larry Lessig (Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace). "Pathetic dot" -- knowledge. Law isn't the only code, as markets, norms, architecture are all significant.
David Weinberger (Everything is Miscellaneous) -- previous categories (Dewey decimal system) are meaningless.
Access to knowledge -- Yale conferences.
Wrap-up: Berkman center at 10. Thinking of what it means to be a research center. Pushing to be University-wide (instead of current place at Law School)
YouNiversity (oy). Youtube, Time person of the year, Web 2.0, etc.
Post-keynote discussion: Impact of Open Courseware. what happens when MIT isn't the only one out there? One person notes that the Sheepshin (diploma) is what people are really paying for, not the knowledge, which can (and ideally should) be shared.
One comment from 2002: "Yes, opening courses will dillute Harvard's brand, and yes, we should do it anyway." recognition that sharing knowledge is a responsibility of University. Google Book search system (Harvard, Emory, etc). Greater concern: Potential dilution of actual University education (teaching seminars, mentoring grad students) as a result of efforts expended on open coursework.
One faculty member (Harry Lewis, former Dean) notes that no dilution in reputation has been spotted.
is2k7
I'm at the Internet and Society 2007 Conference today, and will be liveblogging anything of interest, with edits to this post as things come up. Most of what I'm writing is stuff that stands out as being of interest to me; apologies ahead of time if my notes are disjointed; I'll attempt to organize things more efficiently later.
Registration/pre-conference notes:
1. I'd forgotten just how big Harvard is. Fortunately, finding the Law School was not a problem.
2. Alas, the food court next door does not take credit cards. How is Harvard so far behind Emory and Brandeis?
3. Registration was painless. Just grabbed my badge, my info packet, and my complimentary deck of Berkman Center playing cards. There's copious amounts of free (and mediocre) coffee, as well as assorted tiny pastries.
4. There's also free wireless (of course), a Realplayer stream, a Second Life presence, an irc channel, and other virtual presences. Stuff all conferences should have.
5. The Mac/PC ratio here is about 7:1. Thats the sign of a conference filled with intelligent people. :-)
Introductions
1. Charles Nesson was unable to make it, as he needed emergency surgery. He's supposed to join us virtually at some point later, post-surgery, once he's coherent enough to type with at least one finger. That's heroism. :-)
2. Charles Ogletree, of the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice, is speaking now. Speaking towards the nature of citizenship and individuals in society. Good speech, going over the history of the conference
3. Nesson pre-prepared audio speech. He assures us that the medical situation is nothing serious (thankfully). Key question: What are the concerns and responsibilities of the university in relation to society, individuals, corporations, and others?
4. Professor Mary Wong (specializing in intellectual law), speaking on yesterday's pre-conference events. 80+ folks met last night discussing the theme of "University as Client."
- University goal #1: Utilitarian, provide training.
- University goal #2: Expose and explore difficult issues, better society
(The latter, of course, is what I think most of us hope for universities for strive for).
- Commericialzation. Licensing in and licensing out (Fetch comes to mind, as does scientific research).
-Intellectual Property, copyright ownership are focus of debates.
-Fair Use. Vagueness is a perpetual problem. Can all stakeholders be made happy?
- Should university act as IP enforcer? There wasn't any consensus on this one, not suprisingly (although I come down firmly on the "no" side).
-Ideal licensing? Can we improve the current situation.
(Of note, Ames Courtroom is nearly full by this point. Good to see this level of attendance.)
Keynote: John Palfrey (exec director of Berkman Center)
1. Born Digital (title of speech).
(Note: I'm assuming that Palfrey's presentation will be available online, and I'll link to it later).
A. Perspective of students. Difference between being born digital vs learning to be digital. Four major attributes of natives:
-Digital identities
Facebook, myspace, Second Life, etc.
-Multi-tasking
students with laptops, etc. Changes how they take classes, interact in real life.
-Digital Media
digital cameras, flickr, youtube, blogs, etc. Google/Wikipedia equals "research" to many.
-Consumers to creators
Feedback loop for processing information. Second Life, RSS, Wikipedia. "Semiotic Democracy."
New Media Literacies -- challenges:
The Participation Gap (classic Digital Divide).
Ethics.
Transparency.
B. Teachers.
Can Digital immigrants be reborn (and should we?) Second Life avatars.
New Networks: Facebook. All students have it before they even come to college. Should Faculty have Facebook accounts? Is your teacher your "Friend" (to use Facebook/LJ terminology)? Should he or she be?
Emergent Tools -- Should wikis and other tools supplant traditional tools like the Socratic Method (and what sort of happy medium can be achieved?).
Digital Identity -- learners and information are born digital. Therefore, "How does University understand its own emerging digital identity?"
Currently, information might start digital, and gets transferred to newsprint or other formats, as opposed to being born on paper as in previous generations.
Public Library of Science.
Open Access. If we bridge the digial divide, how does that affect digital community. OpenNet Initiative. How does that affect University as a whole?
Cathedral to Bazaar. Virtual "ID required" card stopping access to digital learning. Science commons, Scratch, OpenCourseware as alternatives. Harvard (and University as a whole) needs an answer to OpenCourseware.
Hard Questions. Questions asked pre-conference can be found here. A few big ones:
(University/Corporations. Google, MPAA, RIAA, Reed Elsevier, Second Life, Blackboard, etc. )What relationship should exist between University and corporations? Should university deliver pre-litigation letters (hell no!).
What is the best way to invest in libraries in a digital age? This includes physical spaces as well as subscription services. Is it proper to invest in access to digital subscriptions, when they could go away?
(Aside: The guy next to me is staring at LOL Cats images)
How do we fund and sustain a generation of digital knowledge (related to the previous two questions)?
YALSA. Literacy and social networks: How does the new generation of library scientists learn? Wikipedia, of course.
What is the impact of an outdated copyright system? The current system is simply not capable of handling today's technology and the University. See Fair Use, CCC, RIAA, etc. Should University take a leadership role to change the system?
Notable figures and knowledge:
Larry Lessig (Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace). "Pathetic dot" -- knowledge. Law isn't the only code, as markets, norms, architecture are all significant.
David Weinberger (Everything is Miscellaneous) -- previous categories (Dewey decimal system) are meaningless.
Access to knowledge -- Yale conferences.
Wrap-up: Berkman center at 10. Thinking of what it means to be a research center. Pushing to be University-wide (instead of current place at Law School)
YouNiversity (oy). Youtube, Time person of the year, Web 2.0, etc.
Post-keynote discussion: Impact of Open Courseware. what happens when MIT isn't the only one out there? One person notes that the Sheepshin (diploma) is what people are really paying for, not the knowledge, which can (and ideally should) be shared.
One comment from 2002: "Yes, opening courses will dillute Harvard's brand, and yes, we should do it anyway." recognition that sharing knowledge is a responsibility of University. Google Book search system (Harvard, Emory, etc). Greater concern: Potential dilution of actual University education (teaching seminars, mentoring grad students) as a result of efforts expended on open coursework.
One faculty member (Harry Lewis, former Dean) notes that no dilution in reputation has been spotted.
is2k7Labels: IS2k7
