Creative Commons is both a solution and yet another failure to deal with authorship and copyright on the internet.

“We have built upon the “all rights reserved” concept of traditional copyright to offer a voluntary “some rights reserved” approach.”

Lawrence Lessig

Introduction

Nowadays community moves from the industrial to the digital era, the ease from which extensive quantities of information can be stored, manipulated, be controlled and transferred, has led to technical rules concerning the copyright and authorship in general. Such changes have amounted to creators and owners of copyright enjoying extensive powers over the protection, use, and exploitation of their works. According to the Creative Commons (CC) website, CC is a nonprofit corporation with the main aim to making it easier for people to share and use work of others legally, consistent with the rules of copyright. Also it provide free licenses and other legal tools to mark creative work with the freedom the creator wants it to carry, so others can share, remix, use commercially. There are different views on work of CC because it can be a both a solution and a failure to deal with authorship and copyright on the internet.The CC influence, therefore, should be assessed in terms of elements that positively affect copyright and authorship, and elements that negatively affect copyright and authorship on the internet. Firstly we will consider is CC a solution to deal with authorship and copyright on the internet, and in the next part it will be the opposite view on it.

Creative Commons is a solution to deal with authorship and copyright on the internet.

Due to the fact that CC was established in 2001, the impacts of CC licensing are still being discovered and identified. So, the first positive aspect to deal with authorship and copyright on the internet is marketing opportunities available to artists and creators. For instance internet music distributor the founder of Magnatune said that:”CC is like a marketing tool, free distribution generates exposure, and that builds commercial demand, which is where the real money is.” (A.Raskin, 2004), Therefore, CC is the solution to deal with authorship and copyright on the internet is the marketing opportunities which are available to people who create the things.
The less important but also valuable aspect in terms of CC is a solution to deal with authorship and copyright on the internet is the licensing simplicity of its operation. Simplifying annual dynamics of changes of indication of permissions and reusing material, licensing CC uses what K. Weatherall underline in her report ‘optimal standardization. The theory by means of what you allow certain number of the property rights to satisfy most people. It means, that this allows users of CC licences to confidently contribute work to the commons without engaging in excessive legal consultation. Moreover, while the legal enforceability of the licences is questioned by some, it must be noted that on the two cases is international, where profit licences have come before the courts, they have been supported. So, another aspect which support that CC is the solution to deal with authorship and copyright on the internet is the licensing simplicity it employs of its operation.

Creative Commons is a failure to deal with authorship and copyright on the internet.

The first aspect in terms of CC is a failure to deal with authorship and copyright on the internet is moral rights that have been happened with many creators.
The moral rights remain unaffected by CC, the practical implications of CC licence suggest differently. Professorial Fellow, Victorian College of Arts Richard Jones states: “This is a political decision; it is a social decision; it is an issue of control. But it is control sought for reasons other than ego or money.” (B Fitzgerald et al, 63, 70.) This loss of control of moral rights is further aggravated by the fact that a CC licensed work may later make it “more difficult than necessary to establish that someone doing what the licence allows has infringed that creator’s moral rights.” (McDonald , 3, 229.) Columnist John C. Dvorak said several interesting concerns about Creative Commons Initiative in term of moral rights and issues.
“Creative Commons actually seems to be a dangerous system with almost zero benefits to the public, copyright holders, or those of us who would like a return to a shorter-length copyright law, “he said. “If I write something on my blog, for example, and decide not to cover it with the general copyright notice, I can simply say that it is in the public domain and be done with it. I do not need permission from Creative Commons, nor do I need to mention Creative Commons or anything else. It's in the public domain by my personally allowing it to be so. This is my right! I don't need a middleman—a Creative Commons Commissar—to approve my decision. And yet there is this perception that I do, “he added.
Thus, Creative Commons is a failure to deal with authorship and copyright on the internet because of moral rights, it means that people can decide by themselves what they should do, and how to use the information. Also, there are another problems or failures in CC, one of them is disclaimer of warranties.


One of the major drawbacks of CC licences operating within the internet industry and important failure to deal with authorship and copyright is the fact that all the licences contain a disclaimer of warranties. Actually, it means that licence CC does not provide a guarantee that the licensor has all necessary rights to permit reuse of the licence work.Also, the user of material CC is effectively taking it on confidence that the licensor is allocated by the right to licence such material. Without compensations or warranties, CC licences appear, therefore, very difficult to incorporate into the internet industry as there is no guarantee or protection concerning validity of the licensors rights to the material being licensed. (http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FAQ) Columnist John C. Dvorak said about Creative Commons in terms of copyright and other issues.
“Years ago, to gain a copyright, you had to fill out a form and send in the material to the Library of Congress. Now you just use the word "copyright," add your name and a date, and publish it. Apparently simplicity was more than some people could handle, so they invented Creative Commons to add some artificial paperwork and complexity to the mechanism. And it seems to actually weaken the copyrights you have coming to you without Creative Commons.”
So, there are many different views on work of Creative Commons connected with copyright and authorship.
Stanford law Professor Lawrence Lessig states: “we’re a bit skeptical of the Creative Commons initiative because it moves copyright issues into the realm of contract law. … Instead, we think copyright should remain firmly a federal public policy debate.”
(http://www.copycense.com/2007/06/on_lessig.html)
Thus, from these statements it is clear seen the view of people on Creative Commons and their opinion on copyright and authorship, and we can see that there are many critics and failure in terms of copyright and authorship in CC.

Conclusion

It can be deduced that, CC is an international ‘open content’ movement aimed at increasing the volume of, and access to, creative works in the intellectual commons of society. CC licensing allows for the relinquishment of some or all rights previously protected by copyright. In my opinion there are more drawbacks or failures in terms of Creative Commons to deal with authorship and copyright on the internet rather than solution to deal with it. I agree that we should be clear to recognize that Creative Commons and efforts to really rethink copyright are two separate things, but that doesn't mean that Creative Commons is necessarily bad for copyright and authorship policy issues. There are also impacts which can be a solution to deal with authorship and copyright on internet.

Bibliography

Books,Articles,Reports

A Raskin, “Giving it Away (for Fun and Profit)” (2004) 5(4) Business 2.0

B Fitzgerald et al, “Cultivating the creative commons: Perspectives from the creative industries” (2006) 11 Media and Arts Law Review.

B Fitzgerald and I Oi, “The Australian Creative Commons Project” (2005) 22(4) Copyright Reporter 138.

Lessig, The Future of Ideas – The fate of the commons in a connected world, 2001

McDonald, “Creative Commons: just say ‘CC’?” (2006) 24(4) Copyright Reporter

Electronic, Internet sources

Creative Commons,official web site:

http://creativecommons.org/ , access at 16 October 2009.Creative Commons, Creative Commons – Frequently Asked Questions
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FAQ access at 18 October 2009.

Creative Commons, About Creative Commons.

http://creativecommons.org/about/ access at 19 October 2009.

"Creative Commons a useful development in New Zealand"

www.nzipa.org.nz/SITE_Default/x-files/96312.pdf, access at 20 October 2009.

"Copyright Law,New Media and the Future"

http://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bitstream/2123/2357/1/CopyrightAsiaPacific_Ch9.pdf, access at 18 October 2009.

"Does Creative Commons free your content?"

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2004/05/01/368240/index.htm,access at 20 October 2009.

Interview with Cory Doctorow, Part 1: Copyfight and Creative Commons.

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-3000_7-6357305-1.html access at 19 October 2009.

K Weatherall, “Would you ever recommend a Creative Commons License?” (2006) http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/AIPLRes/2006/4.html access at 19 October 2009.

Lawrence Lessig, Free Culture (2004).

http://www.copycense.com/2007/06/on_lessig.html access at 20 October 2009.

McDonald Creative Commons: just say “CC”?
www.copyright.org.au/pdf/acc/articles_pdf/a06n13.pdf access at 19 October 2009

My 3 minutes video

Cooking time
I havent got any video camera. So i made my video like slideshow with the help of my camera. I made a pictures, and download the music and some pictures from the Creative Commons web site and download it on Youtube
Enjoy

Assuming topic for essay

I think that I’ll write my New Com Tech essay on this topic.

2. The idea of the internet as cyberspace has been a part of our contemporary culture for some time, particularly in the popular medium of film. But is the concept of cyberspace still relevant to our contemporary society? Discuss with reference to your own experience of contemporary media.

However, I’ll be searching for the resources, books and journals during semester break.

According to Lecture 7

A shared culture.

http://creativecommons.org/

When I did my 3 minutes video, I used creative common pictures and music. My first expression was not so good. I realized that is difficult to find useful pictures, in useful colors, and appropriate music for my tute task. However, after 30 minutes of my work with this web site, it became easier to find appropriate information, because I understood how to work with this web site, and where I should search the information.


· “Share, Remix, Reuse — Legally”: creative commons.

The main idea of Lecture 7 was on concept of free culture and free division of the contents which takes place within an Internet and as it relates with the copyright in general. One of the examples of such free culture is Creative Commons.

“Creative Commons is a nonprofit corporation dedicated to making it easier for people to share and build upon the work of others, consistent with the rules of copyright.”

Creative Commons was founded in 2001, and since that time, this corporation growth increasingly mainly because it ensure free licenses and other legal instruments to register creative work with freedom which the founder wants that it bore, thus others can participate, repeatedly mix up, use commercially, or any combination of it. So, the main aim of the creative commons is to share the information legally. In 2008 it was estimated 130 million Creative Commons licensed works. The whole item of it, protect the founder from other use of their work, with the purposes of which they did not intend. In addition, the large part of philosophy of the Creative Commons has appeared from users who wanted more freedom with the various computer softwear.

“The Idea that we can voluntarily relax our copyrights in the interests of sharing comes from the Free Software movement.”

· Free and open source software.

There was the time, when computer software, when people are shared the codes between each other. This was the best time for software programs and everything was free. However, during the time, software industry was growing with the high speed, and many restrictions have been made by companies. For instance: Microsoft. So, in 1981 Richard M Stallman started the Free Software foundation. His aim was to create absolutely free software like it was before. He believed that users should be allocated by the right on ' four freedom. In addition users should be able to adapt the program for their own requirements, to operate the program as they like, to extend their changes, to remove copies and finally to have a choice to improve the software. Finally, as I understood Richard Stallman created legal document (GNU), to control Four Freedom which had controlled what you can and can’t do with software.
Nowadays there are such concepts like open software. The main advantage of such software, is that it is free, and you can have specially features in it.

“The name free software is replaced with Open source.”

There are examples of free software (open source): Linux,Firefox,OpenOffice etc.
I never ever used free software on my computer. However, after this lecture I installed free software on my computer, just to find differences. So, I found it interesting to use, to found out new abilities and features which you can’t find in Windows, and it is absolutely free. In some ways, I found it better than Microsoft.

To sum up, the main aim of Creative Commons is that this corporation gave us an opportunity to share information legally. People are uploading their music, pictures, photos, and other staff to show their talent to other people and to look what others are gave to look for. It is interesting, to know that people are uploading their photos from flickr, because they want to share their photos with others people all over the world. This idea is great, and carry peace and sort of friendship in it, mainly because people are share and not steal, and they help each other. In my opinion, Creative Commons is useful website, and I think that I’ll be using it anyway.

According to Lecture 6

Video Consumption and Production.

Week 6th lecture was mainly about nowadays video consumption and production in our lives.
In my opinion, all people are consumers and producers in their lives. People can be consumers and producers in same way. Generally, we are contents consumers. In our daily lives we consume professionally created, made and have edited the contents from traditional and new manufacturers of mass-media. In our lecture it was mentioned that some time ago people only were able observe of mass-media, but not participate in its process. However, nowadays it has changed considerably. Nowadays, it is difficult to find a people which haven’t got a computer, or haven’t got access to it. I think that there are some people mainly in less developed countries. Computers are everywhere, and internet is the one reason why the computers became so popular nowadays. People all over world are consumers, because they consuming the information from the internet, which other people are making, producing.
An internet became first source for people to look for, it is much easier to look news or TV shows in internet, rather than waiting when it would be on TV and watching it with huge amount of advertisement. For instance: I prefer to find something on internet, watch it rather than watching on TV, mainly because it saves my time for other things.

Nowadays people can be always on-line. In general, it is because people can use their mobile phones to be always online. Yes, the quality is not so good, because usually the files are big, but the screen on our mobile is small for it. However, people still can watch videos on Vimeo or Youtube and be in touch with their friends with the help of mobile phone. I think that it is easier, because usually I am not caring my lap top with me, because I always haven’t got free space in my bag to it. But, I can use my mobile phone, if I need to watch a video, or write something in twitter or facebook. So, it is always help me in some ways. We can say that consumption becomes more and more personal especially with mobile systems.


As I said before, it is interesting that people were just consumers, but some time later people began producers too. I was consumer all my life before new com tech course. Two weeks ago, I became a producer, when I made my first video, and placed in on the Youtube. So, now people can watching and comment it. According to lecture 6 the films which were made by consumers for consumer viewers are called “fan-films”, because they are made by and for people who have an interest in such films. For instance such film as: StarWars(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5ELvzHa7gM) I can say that people who interested in StarWars made this film for StarWars fans.

People can become a producer easy, with the help of the mobile phone camera. On the news programs, it became a popular to put the segment of video, which was recorded on mobile phone by the people who were in this place. It became popular, because people always have an access to their mobile phones, and can make a video in any time, and when the accident is happened too. I remember such videos from Tsunami in Thailand, when people are screaming and the huge wave is coming on the Phuket Island. In consequence, such videos were on many channels on TV, and in the internet websites and news.

Another aspect of consumption and production is the problem that consumers making the contents of entertainment on a mobile phone, consists that it usually looks and it seems awful. Josh Nicholas said that ,it is a lot of festivals ' cellular telephone Cinema ' have arisen for last 5 years, however at the majority is disappeared the same as the fast.
It can be deduced, that nowadays people always have an access to their mobile phones and internet. I can say that most of them were transformed from consumers to producers in many ways.

Video- Week 6

This is my new video. "Bee story"
I tried to make it funny, with the help of Play-Doh, and my camera.

3D worlds and socialising on the internet Week 5

I’m using MSN chat, and I never used 3D before. I think that there are many differences between IM programs and 3D programs. However, one of the important one is that in IM programs you just can text messages and send smilies. In 3D programs you can see everything like in real life, and using voice chat. In IM programs you can use web cam, and clear see your opponent, because now such programs have a good quality, and it became much better to use it.


You can see people with whom you are communicating, and seeing their emotions, rather than send just a smile. In my opinion, that chats IM programs are easier and faster to use.

“Activeworlds offers a comprehensive platform for efficiently delivering real-time interactive 3D content over the web. Activeworlds' 3D content is dynamic, visually compelling and most importantly provides users a richer, more exciting online experience”
http://www.activeworlds.com/overview.asp

“The Active Worlds Universe has a unique and diverse global community. Our citizens come from all walks of life, speak many languages, and represent every age group.”
http://www.activeworlds.com/community/index.asp

So, I think that there are many different between these programs, but it is difficult to me talk about it, because I’m never use it. However, some people prefer IM programs and others 3D programs such as: Second life, active worlds and others.