wongaBlog
9Mar/060

Poor Judgement

What happens if you sue some gossip magazine who took all your Non-Commercial-Use Creative-Commons licensed photos from your Flickr account, then published them to make a profit? Apparently, the magazine gets told that they are very naughty, and will be given an incredibly minor fine if they do it again. So Creative Commons stands up in court, but this judgement means it's effectively useless in practice. Great. Also, said magazine is apparently allowed to publish details of your child's school, and the transport methods s/he uses to get there and back, without any punishment at all.

3Mar/060

You like monkeys, you like ponies

Escape Pod last week played a song that I highly recommend you check out (and the story's pretty good too). It's Skullcrusher Mountain by Jonathan Coulton, and is available for free under a Creative Commons license. It's probably not the kind of song you're expecting from the title :-) The lyrics are just great. It's also on iTunes.

In a similar vein, a while back Adam Curry played a song called 'Super Powers' by Mark Says Hi, which I liked so much I wanted to buy (for no more than 79p, obviously :-) ), but found that there's currently no way to do so online. So disappointing!

I'm off to London for the weekend. Should be back Sunday.

2Dec/050

Podcasting Harmony

Just listened to Daily Source Code #290, and it really demonstrated the good and bad sides of the internet community.

On the one hand, you've got the fantastic "Podsafe for Peace" christmas song, for which 96(!) different artists sent in contributions. I really like the end result - it's a great festive song imho. It's entirely 'podsafe', which means that anybody can play it on a podcast without paying royalties. It'll be available to purchase very soon, hopefully on iTunes amongst other places. All proceeds are going to UNICEF.

I thought that was great. People have put a huge amount of work into something created almost entirely to increase other people's happiness. It'll also help publicise podcasting and independent music in general. The song just premiered on DSC last night, and I'll post a link once it's online and listenable. EDIT: It's now up on the Podsafe Music Network.

Then, though, there's the massive debacle over DSC presenter Adam Curry and Wikipedia. On Wednesday's show Adam said that the Wikipedia podcasting entry wasn't entirely correct in that he and Dave Winer were barely mentioned. Later that day the entry changed and a couple of paragraphs disappeared. Somebody traced the changes back to Adam's IP, and all hell broke loose. Digg and countless blogs have viciously attacked him, claiming that he's "anonymously editing the podcasting entry on Wikipedia to remove credit from other people and inflate his role in its creation". I came across this independently, and there's some pretty nasty stuff out there.

On today's show Adam admits that "after about 20 minutes of trying to figure out the interface of the editing system I became exasperated and gave up." So I just looked at the differences, and it seems to come down to the re-working of one sentence1. You could interpret the sentence as inflating his own role, but it's rather a stretch. There's far more he could have changed if he wanted to do that! Reading between the lines of the show, I think he wanted to clarify the description much more, but the wiki syntax caused problems and he stopped. There's no evidence of malicious intent here, it's all assumed.

Did anybody ask him what had happened? Or did they just assume, then watch as people jumped onto the bandwagon? His celebrity status made him an easy target, and people got in line to hurl insults at anything they could think of2. The ip database unfortunately put his mobile phone number online for all to see, so I bet he's had a few calls too. It quickly descended into personal attacks, and is all pretty pathetic. The Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory springs to mind. It seems that if you're passionate about anything, you need to develop a thick skin. It doesn't matter who you are or what you do, there'll be plenty of people out there willing to tear you down.

So on the one hand we've got people who altrustically got together to create a song, and on the other a bunch of sarcastic losers. They may be fewer in number, but at least one group can say they were part of something decent, and useful.

  1. he explained that the other paragraph simply isn't true []
  2. often his hair, because he dares not to be like everybody else - how awful! []
2Sep/050

PMN Responds to Criticism

I just spotted that Adam Curry responded to the concerns about the Podsafe Music Network:

As announced on yesterday's Daily Source Code, we've changed the podcaster terms on the PodSafe Music Network. This is a great example of how the web works; it started with a post on Boing Boing and was followed by a host of pile-jumpers. Although a personal email would have been preferred, it certainly got my attention.

After reviewing the terms and feedback we decided to change the terms to more suitable language. Everyone seems happy with them, and we're always open to suggestions.

I haven't listened to the Source Code where he talks about it, yet.

29Aug/050

Podshow Small Print

There's an interesting debate brewing over Adam Curry's Podshow Network. Podshow is an organisation devoted to promoting podcasting. Anybody can put their podcast under the Podshow banner and gain access to the advertising benefits of the service. It also makes it much easier for listeners to find podcasts they like. On Friday Cory Doctorow posted on Boing Boing about the requirements of running your podcast under the Podshow 'label':

The problem is that in return for access to PodCast music, you agree to a license that prohibits you from referencing "software piracy (warez, cracking, etc.), hacking, phreaking, emulators, ROM's, or illegal MP3 activity" or saying anything "deemed unsuitable or harmful to the reputation of PodShow or the Licensor."

This is pretty nuts. Since when does the guy who provides the music to the radio station get to dictate what you're allowed to talk about? Is the price of commercial music in a PodCast that you have to yield unlimited, arbitrary editorial control to a music label?

I'll be interested to hear Adam Curry's response to this. I've been listening to his podcast for a few months, and I know he's a strong advocate of the music-sharing culture and is certainly no fan of the major music labels. If he's gone with the conditions Cory reports, I would think he'll have a reasoned reply. I'll listen to the Daily Source Codes over the coming week and report on what's said.