|
|
Post by thuviaptarth on Nov 13, 2011 11:52:56 GMT -5
A lot of you have probably already seen this, but in case someone hasn't: The Organization for Transformative Works is asking for vidders to offer stories about vidding in support of a DMCA exemption that protects vidders and other remix artists who break DRM to create artwork. They are looking for non-US voices as well. The first deadline is December 1. They say, More info at the OTW news blog. I am not affiliated with the OTW. I am just really, really happy to have legal protection for ripping DVDs. |
|
|
|
Post by gnattery on Nov 13, 2011 21:26:09 GMT -5
PFFFF. What. That would be hilarious if they weren't serious.
|
|
|
|
Post by thuviaptarth on Nov 13, 2011 23:16:55 GMT -5
I wasn't sure whether to laugh or cry.
|
|
|
|
Post by gnattery on Nov 13, 2011 23:23:51 GMT -5
The most ridiculous thing is that it wouldn't actually solve their problem. We're still using source that is copyrighted, and we'd still able to do so with the same amount of convenience as before since those ways and means will still exist. They'd just be asking us really nicely to please stop what we're doing now, and instead use a method that is both ridiculously annoying, and also entirely unnecessary for us. They come up with an alternative that is specifically designed to attempt to discourage us from vidding at all, but they're not able to enforce it anyway, since if they were then we wouldn't be able to vid now. As far as compromises go, that isn't one. It's both overly demanding and entirely circumventable.
Actually, now that I think about it, it's never going to be a compromise. They don't have anything we want that they can offer in return, which they could feasibly give us, as long as their goal is to hamper vidding as much as they can. Compromise requires actual negotiations, not just unreasonable demands and condescension.
|
|
|
|
Post by amnisias on Nov 14, 2011 7:23:11 GMT -5
I feel much more positive about this process. The first time the OTW made a presentation to the MPPA it was perceived very well and had tangible results. The fact that the copy-right holders are pushing for the issue to be looked at again was to be expected and is part of the democratic process. What it requires from fandom is to engage with the process and provide the arguments and supporting evidence (which worked well last time). This is going to be a boring and long-winded process, I agree. The temptation for many will be to take a fatalistic stance ("They are going to screw us over anyway... why bother?"), withdraw from the process and then feel validated if the ruling is not upheld (or extended).
|
|
|
|
Post by killabeez on Nov 17, 2011 16:47:27 GMT -5
I keep feeling as though I haven't made any vids lately that are worthy of using as examples. It's stopping me every time I try to write something up. I wish I had a better idea of whether that's significant or not? I can't help feeling that a vid that's significant to a large portion of fandom is a better example to use, and I haven't made anything like that in a very long time.
|
|
|
|
Post by giandujakiss on Nov 19, 2011 0:20:31 GMT -5
Killa - fwiw, I think the ITW selects vids as examples and they generally try to pick vids both for artistry, and for accessibility -i.e., vids that they think will translate, or are translatable, to non-fans. That doesn't mean the vids are better, obviously, it just means they're better examples for their particular advocacy. And that actually has little to do with popularity within fandom, although there may be correlation.
But to the extent they want a statement, that's not necessarily connected to the vids they use as examples. For that, I think they're looking for articulate messages they can pass on. (Just a guess - I talk to OTW people, that's pretty obvious, but I'm not a member so I'm just telling you what I'm inferring).
Point being, I wouldn't worry about your vids. They're asking for statements - if you have something to say, say it. What vids they actually choose to make their case is a different issue than the verbal statements they submit, and the OTW people are best positioned to decide what they think will best support the argument, so I wouldn't worry about that.
|
|
|
|
Post by killabeez on Nov 19, 2011 12:09:45 GMT -5
They're asking for statements - if you have something to say, say it. I didn't really have something to say, but I said it anyway.  |
|
|
|
Post by rokikurama on Nov 19, 2011 18:13:35 GMT -5
Yea! The more material they have, honestly, the more I imagine it helps their case. I completely agree with you, amnisias, although I think there need to be some pretty large shifts for us to end up in the place we want to be  This process is a bit of a strange one because (as I understand it, anyway, I'm an academic working in this area but not yet part of the OTW) it's so specifically about whether or not we should be able to circumvent copyright protection on DVD's because the DMCA act has no artistic fair use exemption, like most copyright law (for, say, music) does. It's not about the larger issues of using copyrighted material for our work (unless the court wants to make a bigger statement and go there), as the fact that they're actually suggesting we use the main method of pre-DVD release piracy for our work points to. |
|
|
|
Post by jackiek on Nov 21, 2011 15:19:25 GMT -5
I posted. Hopefully this will be somewhat useful - though I suspect that they won't want to use that particular vid as an example.
|
|
