Musikere: Fildeling er ikke en forbrydelse

En række kendte britiske musikere med folk som Billy Bragg, Annie Lennox og Peter Gabriel i spidsen erklærer nu, at fildeling ikke bør kriminaliseres, skriver The Independent:

Musicians including Robbie Williams, Annie Lennox, Billy Bragg, Blur’s David Rowntree and Radiohead’s Ed O’Brien said last night that the public should not be prosecuted for downloading illegal music from the internet.

Bragg told The Independent that most of the artists had voted against supporting any move towards criminally prosecuting ordinary members of the public for illegally downloaded music.

The musicians will express their views to Lord Carter, who suggested that individuals downloading music illegally should be brought to justice.

While Lennox was not able to attend the meeting, she sent a message of support, as did Peter Gabriel, while David Gray, Fran Healy from Travis, Pink Floyd’s Nick Mason and Mick Jones from The Clash turned up in support.

Bragg was speaking as a key member of the coalition, which was set up to give a collective voice to artists who want to fight for their rights in the digital world. It is pushing for a fairer deal for musicians at a time when they can use the internet to forge direct links with their fans. “What I said at the meeting was that the record industry in Britain is still going down the road of criminalising our audience for downloading illegal MP3s,” he said.

“If we follow the music industry down that road, we will be doing nothing more than being part of a protectionist effort. It’s like trying to put toothpaste back in the tube.”

Ak, en sådan indsigt er ikke på vej i Danmark, hvor IFPIs Jesper Bay støtter sig til villavejs-rapperne Jokeren og Niarn og lover at fortsætte den gamle recept, som bl.a. har budt på retssager mod skoleelever – på sin blog skriver han:

Det er ikke rimeligt at kalde Enhedslistens spidskandidat, for “kælling”. Men Niarns udmelding fortjener alligevel opmærksomhed. Ligesom Jokerens blot en uge tidligere i et interview i Jyllands-Posten (1.3.). Her tog også han i befriende utvetydige vendinger afstand fra dem blandt publikum, der henter musikken ulovligt.

Ak ja, i det store udland er de ved at se lyset, men herhjemme bakser de stadig ihærdigt med at få tandpastaen tilbage i tuben. Hvilket naturligvis er ganske omsonst. Jokeren og Niarn er tåber, hvis de ikke selv kan se det. Kopiering er billigt i den elektroniske alder, kopibeskyttelse eller DRM er kørt ud på et sidespor, og befolkningens retbevidsthed siger allerede, at hvad der er meget let, kan eller bør der ikke være noget galt i.

Hvilket alt sammen slet ikke behøver at komme kunstnerne eller musikken til skade. Musikere har brug for nye forretningsmodeller, ikke for at retsforfølge deres eget publikum.

Link: It’s not a crime to download, say musicians

The Cult of Done

“The Cult of Done Manifesto”, en krigserklæring mod prokrastinering fra folk, der tror på det nyttige i at få ting fra hånden:

The Cult of Done Manifesto

  1. There are three states of being. Not knowing, action and completion.
  2. Accept that everything is a draft. It helps to get it done.
  3. There is no editing stage.
  4. Pretending you know what you’re doing is almost the same as knowing what you are doing, so just accept that you know what you’re doing even if you don’t and do it.
  5. Banish procrastination. If you wait more than a week to get an idea done, abandon it.
  6. The point of being done is not to finish but to get other things done.
  7. Once you’re done you can throw it away.
  8. Laugh at perfection. It’s boring and keeps you from being done.
  9. People without dirty hands are wrong. Doing something makes you right.
  10. Failure counts as done. So do mistakes.
  11. Destruction is a variant of done.
  12. If you have an idea and publish it on the internet, that counts as a ghost of done.
  13. Done is the engine of more.

Jeg kan især godt lide punkt 5, 9, 10 og 12. Se også den grafiske illustration på billedet herunder.

Link: The Cult of Done Manifesto (via Boing Boing).

Hvad en forlægger kan gøre

Man taler meget om, at Internettet er ved at overtage populærkulturen, at aviserne er ved at uddø, at pladeselskaberne er dinosaurer, osv.

Men dog må der vel være noget, som Internettet ikke bare kan, som f.eks. en forfatter har brug for et forlag og en musiker et pladeselskab/forlag til?

Den canadiske science fiction-forfatter og blogger Cory Doctorow, som vi også citerede i det forrige indlæg, svarer på spørgsmålet i sin seneste klumme i Locus Online os siger, at ja, der er én ting, forlagene kan gøre, som Internettet ikke kan: De kan få bogen ud på boghandlernes hylder.

Doctorow skriver:

Hardly a day goes by that I don’t get an e-mail from someone who’s ready to reinvent publishing using the Internet, and the ideas are often good ones, but they lack a key element: a sales force. That is, a small army of motivated, personable, committed salespeople who are on a first-name basis with every single bookstore owner/buyer in the country, people who lay down a lot of shoe-leather as they slog from one shop to the next, clutching a case filled with advance reader copies, cover-flats, and catalogs. When I worked in bookstores, we had exceptional local reps, like Eric, the Bantam guy who knew that I was exactly the right clerk to give an advance copy of Snow Crash to if he wanted to ensure a big order and lots of hand-selling when the book came in.

This matters. This is the kind of longitudinal, deep, expensive expertise that gets books onto shelves, into the minds of the clerks, onto the recommended tables at the front of the store. It’s labor-intensive and highly specialized, and without it, your book’s sales only come from people who’ve already heard of it (through word of mouth, advertising, a review, etc.) and who are either motivated enough to order it direct, or lucky enough to chance on a copy on a shelf at a store that ordered it based on reputation or sales literature alone, without any hand-holding or cajoling.

The best definition I’ve heard of “publishing” comes from my editor, Patrick Nielsen Hayden, who says, “publishing is making a work public.” That is, identifying a work and an audience, and taking whatever steps are necessary to get the two together (you’ll note that by this definition, Google is a fantastic publisher). Publishing is not printing, or marketing, or editorial, or copy-editing, or typesetting. It may comprise some or all of these things, but you could have the world’s best-edited, most beautiful, well-bound book in the world, and without a strategy for getting it into the hands of readers, all it’s good for is insulating the attic. (This is the unfortunate discovery made by many customers of vanity publishers.)

(…)

It’s easy to imagine a web-based discount printer, web-based copyeditors and proofreaders (the Distributed Proofreader Project, which cleans up the typos in the public domain books in Project Gutenberg, is a proof-of-concept here), web-based marketing and advertising firms (“web-based” may be redundant here — are there any marketers and advertising agencies left who aren’t primarily Internet-based?), web-based PR (ditto), and even web-based editors who serve as book-doctor, rabbi, producer, confessor, and exalted doler-out-of-blessings, gracing a book with their imprimatur, a la Oprah. (…)

This vision has captured the imagination of many of my fellow techno-utopians: a stake through the heart of the Big, Lumbering Entertainment Dinosaurs Who Put Short-Sighted Profits Ahead of Art. And there’s plenty of short-term thinking in the recent history of publishing and the rise of the mega-publishers. There are plenty of “little” publishers out there, dotted around the country, figuring out how to fill in the gaps that the big guys won’t stoop to conquer: short story collections, quirky titles, books of essays, art books, experimental titles, and anthologies. These are often fabulous books with somewhat respectable numbers, but they lag the majors in one key area: physical distribution.

Det er en glimrende observation og siger også noget om, hvad en forfatter får ud af at komme på et etableret forlag frem for selv at stå for det.

Mht. musik er der selvfølgelig den hage ved det, at pladeselskabernes  standardkontrakter snyder kunstnerne så vandet driver, jfr. Courtney Love’s analyse.

Inden for bogudgivelser er det vist ikke helt så slemt (endnu?).

Link: In Praise of the Sales Force

Politikens ‘idealist’-afstemning saboteret af højreorienterede bloggere

Der har stået lidt om det andre steder, bl.a. har Ole Wolf skrevet lidt om ét af sagens aspekter.

Politiken skriver nu selv:

Snyderi i stor stil betød, at to kandidater i slutfasen kom til at kæmpe om førstepladsen. Den ene var tidligere efterretningschef Hans Jørgen Bonnichsen, den anden Jyllands-Postens tegner Kurt Westergaard.

Da 15.000 stemmer var blevet afgivet, viste optællingen, at Kurt Westergaard stod til at vinde.

Men afstemningens regler er, at man kun må afgive én stemme hver, og da politiken.dk’s teknikere havde frasorteret ikke færre end 9.000 snydestemmer, fremstod Hans Jørgen Bonnichsen som den rette vinder.

Snyderiet blev udført af såvel Westergaard-tilhængere som Bonnichsen-supporters. Kurt Westergaard er kendt for sin Muhammed-tegning med bomben i turbanen, mens tidligere PET-chef Hans Jørgen Bonnichsen har talt for mere politisk kontrol med efterretningstjenesten.

Ifølge [ politiken.dk’s interaktionsredaktør] Anders Emil Møller gik det hurtigt op for teknikere og it-specialister i Politikens Hus, at afstemningen havde vakt usædvanlig stor interesse blandt kredse af højreorienterede personer, der støtter Kurt Westergaard.

De pågældende blogger på internettet, og her bliver der ikke efterladt nogen tvivl om deres ønske om at give den kontroversielle Westergaard en sejr.

At det i høj grad var de samme kredse, der stod bag snyderiet, viste sig ved, at næsten 9.000 af stemmerne blev afsendt fra et felt på bare 20 ip-adresser – formentlig svarende til 20 personer. Mens en person alene stemte 2000 gange.

Det skal tilføjes, at jeg egentlig opfatter en sådan “online-kåring” som lidt pjattet, ikke mindst, når det ikke kræves, at stemme-afgiverne enten opretter sig som brugere eller opgiver navn og adresse – “klik og tryk” er for lidt.

Jeg har af samme grund ikke selv promoveret afstemningen eller interesseret mig for dens udfald. Ikke desto mindre er det lidt sjovt at se, hvilke motiver der åbenbart kan forlede nogen til at snyde. Tingene ser ikke altid helt så kønt ud, som folk helst selv ville udlægge dem.

Update: En af de medskyldige i har givet sin egen version af begivenhedernes gang.

Link: Hackere saboterer afstemning om idealisme

Monty Python og fri kultur – en succeshistorie

Kan man tjene penge på at forære sit arbejde væk? Tilsyneladende kan man godt, noterer Times Onlines Tech Blog:

Fed up with being “ripped off” by the hours of illegal clips of their shows on YouTube, they put up a selection of their classic clips.

In a launch video, the Monty Python team said: “We know who you are, we know where you live and we could come after you in ways too horrible to tell. But being the extraordinarily nice chaps we are, we’ve figured a better way to get our own back: We’ve launched our own Monty Python channel on YouTube.

“But we want something in return. None of your drivelling, mindless comments. Instead, we want you to click on the links, buy our movies & TV shows and soften our pain and disgust at being ripped off all these years.”

I know that Python, with its legion of passionate fans, may be an extreme case, but thousands of people did exactly what they were told, clicked on the link to Amazon and bought the videos. The YouTube blog noted:

“When Monty Python launched their channel in November, not only did their YouTube videos shoot to the top of the most viewed lists, but their DVDs also quickly climbed to No. 2 on Amazon’s Movies & TV bestsellers list, with increased sales of 23,000 per cent.”

In other words, Monty Python gave away some content for free and made a pile of money. Food for thought.

Link: The Holy Grail of free content on the web

En million frit tilgængelige fotos fra de Britiske Øer

Wye-floden syd for Llangurig, Wales

Et spændende eksempel på fri kultur i aktion: Geograph er et projekt, der går ud på at samle Creative Commons-beskyttede fotos fra de britiske øer (som altså kan genbruges i f.eks. blogs, tidsskrifter, på hjemmesider, og hvor man ellers har lyst, uden særlig tilladelse men på nærmere angivne betingelser), og knytter dem til punktet på kortet.

Projektet fungerer ved, at folk opretter sig som brugere og indsender deres billeder sammen med koordinaterne, hvor det er taget – man kan både søge og klikke sig frem på et kort. Projektet er nu oppe på ikke mindre end én million billeder fra alle dele af de Britiske Øer!

Værd at kigge på, både hvis man har brug for et billede af et sted i Storbritannien, eller hvis man bare vil se, hvordan der ser ud forskellige steder. På billedet ses Wye-floden syd for Llangurig, Wales. Jeg er sikker på, du selv kan komme på meget mere spændende steder.

Link: Geograph – via Boing Boing.

Dagens citat: Systemudvikling

The conclusion is simple: If a 200-man project has 25 managers who are the most competent and experienced programmers, fire the 175 troops and put the managers back to programming.
Fred P. Brooks, The Mythical Man-Month, Addison-Wesley 1995 (p. 130).

Virker inden for andre områder end programmering, tror jeg.