JeffreyBarke.net

Senator Al Franken speaks up for Net Neutrality at a public hearing in Minneapolis on Thursday, August 19.

In 1984, AT&T, then the largest company in the U.S., was broken up because of the monopoly controls "Ma Bell" had over telecommunications. Known as "Divestiture," we have reached the 25^th anniversary of the AT&T breakup, and it is time to look carefully and critically at the deregulation of telecommunications to evaluate the effectiveness of this important economic policy.

Open Infrastructure Alliance (OIA), together with the Internet Society (ISOC) New York chapter, convened a series of panels on 6 March 2009 to dialog on the deregulation of the telecommunications industry.

Panel one—Historical perspective

• Bruce Kushnick
• Dean Landsman
• Tom Allibone
• Ken Levy
• Alex Goldman
• Mark Cooper

To watch video of the other two panels, visit http://www.isoc-ny.org/?p=618.

Source: ISOC-NY and YouTube

Rewriting the DMCA: How to Improve Section 114

This panel will discuss the ugly bits of the Section 114 compulsory license for digital/internet music usage and what parts are in it for historic reasons that don't apply in today's world; as well as changes that both users of the licenses (webcasters) and content providers (artists, labels) would agree to.

• Rusty Hodge, Program Dir, SomaFM

Who are the copyright users/consumers?

A few people; some people from audio world. Some people from video world.

Several students here. People interested in law.

DMCA signed into law late 90s. With digital, people can make unlimited perfect copies of things. Legislation from a place of panic. With video, copies degraded. With digital, things don't degrade.

AM/FM radio have explicit exemption from using copyright works. When transmitting digitally (including satellite), fall under DMCA. Got some slight exemptions put into place by paying compulsory royalty.

By paying royalty, can play what they want without getting permission from copyright holder. Rates turned out to be ridiculously high. And that's just royalties for performance, not for composing.

Congress looking for feedback on things to change in the DMCA.

[Not sure her name]: concern is about fair use. The problem with fair use definition is extremely vague and generally can only be determined via trial. Culture is always built on existing culture, not invented ex nihilo. Fair use clause is important component of copyright law.

Studios made argument that digital copies would destroy their business model. Compulsory licensing.

Film professors can now de-encrypt a movie to show clips of that movie in their class. Problem is the inability to de-encrypt distribution formats and make clips/copies for fair use purposes without going through major hurdles.

1. Did it transform the original work for a different purpose/content?
2. Was the amount and nature of appropriated material appropriate for the transformed use?

Fair use a logical limit; could involve a 100% reproduction.

The terrible thing about the DMCA is it preempts your right to fair use.

Podcast considerable a mechanical reproduction, not a live performance, because it is downloaded. It is illegal. Streaming audio is cached and therefore illegal as well. If you have a track list, not allowed to announce ahead of time what you're going to play.

Recommends that if you post a podcast, don't also post a track list.

Interactive vs non-interactive use. Jukebox on-demand (interactive).

Goal is to come up with guidelines for print, audio and video. Here's what actually constitutes interactive/fair.

Rusty wants:

1. Commercial use should pay, but not exorbitant rates.
2. NPR podcast had to work out a deal to embedded music clips. Should be paying for incidental music rights. However reporting clips should be fair use.

Record labels often issue takedown notices when they encounter podcasts with embedded material.

Have robots that troll the net, issue takedown notices and it's the tuna net that catches the dolphin. ISPs then take it down, even if fair use. [Find NYT Magazine article on this]

When passed in late 90s, current use wasn't foreseen. Only the copyright owners were sitting at the table.

Actually EFF and others were there in 90s, but they didnt't have constituencies. And they still don't.

Biggest independent voice is probably Creative Commons. They want a bigger change, though, and not necessarily interested in fixing the DMCA.

Problem is that there's not that much good Creative Commons stuff out there now. When people get good, they want to go copyright.

When people build on culture, they build on the most pervasive stuff. And that's the commercial stuff. Creative Commons is cool, but it must exist alongside fair use.

One idea is that all noncommercial use be made fair use.

Discussion of remix culture. Mentioned that is is new, but it as actually very old. Happened all the time in the 19th century. Squelched during the 20th century (mass production), but back now with digital technology.

Discussion turned to fair use, remix artists like Girltalk and whether they should have the right or not and whether they should pay royalties or not.

How Social Networks Are Killing the Revolution

Social networking sites today do as much for real world action as paint on the walls does for the structural integrity of your home. Come discuss how we are creating a false majority-view mentality and how to overcome this to achieve large scale change in the world.

• Steve Swedler, Chief Prod Guy, Gangplank
• Jeremy Tanner, @Penguin
• Todd Huffman, Nucleator, BIL Conference
• Shannon Paul, New Media, Detroit Red Wings

What is the "revolution"?

Any type of change you want to see happen in the real world.

What is "friendship" online?

Three types of online friends:

• Familiar: People you already know.
• Validating: Seek out people on internet who validate your opinion.
• False: Spammers.

Validating can be the most dangerous, because it can lead to complacency. So much noise in validating network, may believe something is actually happening.

Why doesn’t it translate?

* False-majority view (sampling bias)
* Bigger silos (validating groups)
* Noise != action (anonymous)

Anecdote about Anonymous and the Scientology action. None of the Scientologists even knew about Anonymous.

What about Change.org? Smaller, specialized networks. Highly specialized, intentional networks. Attract people who are already committed to action.

Can we do better?

* Feedback
* Redefine social network retro
* Mobile
* Making the message actionable

Tools can be used, but David Armano example. Had the social capital. Made it personal. Rare event—doesn't ask for help often.

How to move people from discussion to action, in response to greeblemonkey.

Download and checkout the Obama iPhone app. Even though the election is over, it is amazing.

Creating feedback loop. This is a place where social networks can play a role in feedback and transparency.

The mobile Web has connected more of the world than the traditional Web.

In terms of redefine social network retro, use the phone, what about meetup.com? Seems like a useful tool for facilitating real world action.
(Someone asked it. Panel feels tools are a bit clumsy.)

The more human we can get online, the better our ability to effect change. Smaller, more applicable and relatable.

Questioner works for PETA and uses the power of their social networks to get people to stop selling fur.

It's a conversation, not direct mail. Don't just send them stuff.

Hmm… ultimate analysis: Only panel I wouldn't recommend. Posting because I was there, but not sure it's worth listening to the audio or reading the notes. I don't feel like I learned anything actionable; I mean, I guess the only thing I really learned was the obvious fact that if you think you're going to change the world via a Facebook group, it hain't going to happen.

Change.org is a citizen-driven effort to identify the best ideas to effect the change the Obama Administration has promised. Anyone can go to http://change.org/ideas and submit a policy idea, discuss with others and vote on the best ideas from around the country.

Just before Inauguration Day, Change.org will host an event in Washington, DC and hand-deliver the top 10 rated ideas to a representative of the Obama Administration. They'll then mobilize the collective energy of the millions of people on Change.org, MySpace and partner organizations to ensure that each winning idea gets the full consideration of the administration and the 111th Congress.

OneWebDay, the Earth Day of the internet, has submitted a proposal to make OneWebDay a national day. Please review their full proposal below, and, if you support it, vote for it at Change.org.

The idea behind OneWebDay is to focus attention on a key Internet value (universal access and digital literacy in 2009), focus attention on local Internet concerns (connectivity, censorship, individual skills) and create a global constituency that cares about protecting and defending the Internet. OneWebDay is like an Earth Day for the Internet, celebrated every September 22 since 2006! We are building an organization that works like the Web: an open platform that supports collaboration on annual projects that educate and activate a broad range of communities about issues that are important for the Internet's future.

In recognition of President-elect Obama's deep understanding of the power of the Internet and his stated pledge to bring "true broadband to every community in America," we hope that the new Administration will recognize OneWebDay and partner with us in 2009 to organize a week of national (and global) service to bring more access and skills to communities that are still left behind in the new digital world.

Tomorrow is the deadline! Please take action and vote at Change.org now!

There were two New York Times articles posted today that I found interesting in themselves, but more interesting when considered together.

In the first one, Al Gore states, forget about "gee-whiz stuff," "Web 2.0 has to have a purpose."

"The purpose, I would urge all of you—as many of you as are willing to take it up—is to bring about a higher level of consciousness about our planet and the imminent danger and opportunity we face because of the radical transformation in the relationship between human beings and the Earth," Mr. Gore said Friday evening at the Web 2.0 Summit in San Francisco.

While I have no desire to discuss a "higher level of consciousness about our planet," I do find it interesting that Al Gore wants to circumscribe the "purpose" of "Web 2.0" and that he dismisses so much of what actually accomplishes. This sentiment really hit me when I read the NYT article on how Obama "wondered if social networking, with its tremendous communication capabilities and aggressive database development, might help him beat the overwhelming odds facing him."

Like a lot of Web innovators, the Obama campaign did not invent anything completely new. Instead, by bolting together social networking applications under the banner of a movement, they created an unforeseen force to raise money, organize locally, fight smear campaigns and get out the vote that helped them topple the Clinton machine and then John McCain and the Republicans.

Web 2.0 clearly has a purpose—communication. The question is not what the purpose is, but how to effectively use it. Something that Barack Obama clearly seems to grasp, but Al Gore?

Look at their websites (Barack Obama, Al Gore) and check out their Twitter accounts (Barack Obama, Al Gore). Who really gets the purpose of Web 2.0?

ISOC-NY's August monthly meeting will take place tomorrow, 14 August 2008, at NYU.

Date: Thursday, 14 Aug 2008
Time: 7:00 pm–9:00 pm
Location: Room 317, 251 Mercer Street NYC (SW corner of West 4th)
Note: Use the entrance on the west side since construction blocks the Mercer Street entrance. Must bring photo ID.

Agenda

• Meet new members. We expect and welcome new faces!
• By-laws reform. Progress report from Joseph Shraibman.
• Planning future meetings and events. Good news is we have just received a sizable grant from ISOC-NY for our Fall program.
• ISXubuntu Linux project progress report. News from our trusty coders.
• OneWebDay planning progress report. Washington Square Sep 22 event taking shape.
• NYC Broadband. Discussion of new report from from the Mayor's office.
• ICANN. We have been accepted as an at-large structure.
• Status of Connecting .NYC. An update from Tom Lowenhaupt.
• Web standards. How can we make our own site more W3C compliant?

I know Apple is restrictive as hell about information, but I was a bit surprised to see how far the non-disclosure agreement (NDA) for the iPhone SDK goes: iPhone developers are legally banned from sharing programming tips, discussing code or asking questions of one another in forums or over e-mail!

From Webmonkey:

"FUCKING NDA" has become a mantra on Twitter. Every time a developer posts about his or her latest run-in with the metaphorical brick wall that is Apple's NDA, the capitalized expletive is sounded off. "FUCKING NDA" has become such a phenomenon, a website has sprung up at FuckingNDA.com to track the twisted tweets.

Apple's software development kit (SDK) for the iPhone is the primary set of tools for building apps for the iPhone, especially if the creations are to be included for sale in the device's App Store. The NDA, which must be agreed to before the SDK can be downloaded, prevents programmers from discussing the finer points of their code.

"There is no legal way for developers to talk about they are developing," Williams laments. "No way to post tutorials. No way to give code away. It's hard to interact with other developers and to write code without reinventing the wheel. Normally, you could post [a coding question] on Twitter and get an answer within minutes."

More info on why the iPhone NDA is no good:

• iPhone NDA: Doing more harm than good—Chris Foresman
• More on the iPhone NDA—Chuqui 3.0
• Lift the iPhone NDA online petition

ISOC-NY's July monthly meeting will take place tonight, 17 July 2008, at NYU.

Date: Thursday, 17 Jul 2008
Time: 7:00 pm–9:00 pm
Location: Room 317, 251 Mercer Street NYC (SW corner of West 4th)
Note: Use the entrance on the west side since construction blocks the Mercer Street entrance. Must bring photo ID.

Agenda

• Meet new members. We expect and welcome new faces!
• By-laws reform. Needed but a drudge! How can we set about it?
• Planning future meetings and events. Good news is we have just received a sizable grant from ISOC-NY for our Fall program.
• ISXubuntu Linux project progress report. News from our trusty coders.
• OneWebDay planning progress report. Washington Square Sep 22 event taking shape
• Access advocacy program. Just an idea at present—the city needs some kind of central resource for those with connection difficulties.
• ICANN. Tom Lowenhaupt will report on his experiences at the ICANN Paris meet in June.
• Web standards. How can we make our own and OneWebDay sites W3C compliant?