Creative Commons legitimised by indiewood?

**miker** · January 26th, 2007, 12:31 PM

You be the judge.

Children Of Men uses sample from Freesound project

**somedeadguy** · January 26th, 2007, 11:48 PM

CREATIVE COMMONS = BEST THING EVER

I have to say that I fully appreciate the society of hackers and nerds that take time out of their day to rip programs or music or even movies and upload them to torrent sites. I'm not saying how I feel about this morally, all I'm going to say is that I don't contribute a dime, and somehow I get to watch the new 300 movie about three months before it comes out. Anything and everything is available for free (illegally of course) from foley sounds to keyed explosions and such. Even the newest FCP and AE Pro is available, for free. It scares me to think of the monetary value in any given torrent site. It must be in the millions.

My question is, is there a point on the horizon where our brand of people will contribute the same to Creative Commons compilations for films use. I have seen some sites offering free stuff, but certainly not as much as any given torrent site.

Or are we as film and media people just too damn busy (or lazy like myself) to do this?

I sure as hell know that I'm not volunteering, but why is it that someone would spend soooo much time and effort, and even risk jailtime to do something that they could do easier and legally?

[ January 26, 2007 08:02 PM: Message edited by: The New and Improved Sean Moss ]

**miker** · January 27th, 2007, 09:18 AM

Nothing is illegal unless you get caught. Then you must be judged by socities values.

If the 12 members of the jury are watching ripped movies on their iPods during the lunchbreak, what do you think the outcome of the first case would be? The case that sets the precedent for societies values.

Decadence killed Roman society. I think we're headed the same way. But it will be Mutha Nature that keeps us in check. Anthropologists say you can tell a lot about the way society is headed by what they threw away. What are you throwing away? That's right, the Art that is movies! (Download, Watch, Delete - I'm just as guilty). So art - our very culture - has become an object to consume, a commodity, a consumable.

I don't know how to turn things around. One way is to try to understand the current context.

The economy of abundance - just how is it going to work in a capitalist society that keeps warring and keeps people elsewhere starved?

**Nigel** · January 28th, 2007, 07:05 PM

CC is a great thing. If I want to give something away but still make sure that I get the recognition of being the author--Perfect.

My issue is that right now copyright has gone to far.

I am all for copyrights and patents. I am all for making money off of your efforts and property. My issue is that giant companies are trying to extend that protection for way way way way way to long in the USA. They are also trying to shift the way that we can use the peoperty we purchased legally.

If I give you a CD you can give it to your friends and you can dub it to a casstte but if you try to copy it to another CD you are considered breaking the law.

The whole issue still needs to be worked out.

Torrent sites are a double edge sword. I know that sharing is good. And information wants to be free.

What if I worked really hard to make something and I spent a lot of money to deliver this great product. Then I see thousands of people spreading it for free via the internet. That would really piss me off.

I have given software to people and I have gotten software from people. But sharing within my close circle of friends seems slightly different than world wide distribution.

Good Luck

**Generic Skinhead** · January 28th, 2007, 07:56 PM

I was gonna weigh in, but you may as well just read Nigel's post. Spot on methinks.

**miker** · January 28th, 2007, 08:35 PM

I think we all know when we're doing "bad things" (whether they are within the law or not), and it's a very complex situation. I would also weigh in with this:

http://www.openp2p.com/lpt/a/3015

Lesson 1: Obscurity is a far greater threat to authors and creative artists than piracy.

Lesson 2: Piracy is progressive taxation

Lesson 3: Customers want to do the right thing, if they can

Lesson 4: Shoplifting is a bigger threat than piracy

Lesson 5: File sharing networks don't threaten book, music, or film publishing. They threaten existing publishers.

Lesson 6: "Free" is eventually replaced by a higher-quality paid service

Lesson 7: There's more than one way to do it.

Well worth reading the whole article IMO. I'm not saying it's the definitive authority on the subject, but it does make some good points.

As to the extension of copyright laws and stuff that's more a reflection of how broken political systems have become, with those in power open to bribes disguised as lobbying.

**Nigel** · January 29th, 2007, 01:53 AM

Miker--

I agree with most of those bulletins.

We could only hope to be lucky enough that people want to steal our shit. That isn't so much my concern.

For me it is whether or not someone wants their product to be passed around the world. Like I said I have given and recieved software that I didn't buy. I have loaded computers with software that they didn't have licenses for. We all want to take the high road.

If I had a product that was a success and people were giving away copies of it on a massive scale I would care. Just as I would care if I owned a store and people were shoplifting from me on a massive scale.

Shop owners can add security. Creators can add security--It is copyright protection. Those protections need to be well reasoned and looked at from time to time as technology changes.

Good Luck

**jb_617** · January 29th, 2007, 08:46 AM

I think for the low/no budget filmmakers that most of us here are that the filesharing/free content thing is great. After all it is VERY unlikely that you can turn a profit from selling a ?600 short. But if you upload it and make the content freely distributable under some kind of GNU style licence then you might get a huge ammount of exposure like that guy with the "spiders on drugs" YouTube fiasco.

The article is fascinating reading by the way. I wonder what his "idea" was to boost the viewings? Any thoughts?

-----------------------

The sweet sweet smell of no profit.

**miker** · January 29th, 2007, 10:18 AM

It wasn't digg.com
http://digg.com/environment/Spiders_of_drugs

or, maybe it was
http://digg.com/videos/comedy/Spider_On_Drugs

in any case, digg et al aside, it pays to advertise (did you not see Tucker: A Man and His Dream??!!)

the majority of the somewhat lacklustre viewings over at http://www.ratemymovie.co.uk/ were garnered from a single ad in the online Freeads (ad now expired)

I'd imagine there's publicity potential at eBay too.

in short, anywhere "normal" people might be found.

**somedeadguy** · January 29th, 2007, 06:31 PM

I don't quite understand how or why these people do it then. Is there any compensation for the guys who rip movies all day, and somehow get it before it's released? I mean why do they do it?

I don't care about whatever hard feelings the distributor would have against me for downloading a movie, but I just wonder what the motivation is for the guy uploading it, because whatever it is, we gotta duplicate it for someone to make some creative commons material.

Thread: Creative Commons legitimised by indiewood?

Thread Tools

Display

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions