Property

Virtual Property

The worst thing about trying to catch up on my blog reading and writing is that some of the stuff becomes dated – but this is still relevant from Technolama.

According to Slashdot, eBay has caved-in to increasing pressure from the games industry and has de-listed all in-game items from its database. However, I’ve made a search and you still can find some items. If you want to buy gold, rare items, swords of power and exotic pets, you will have to go to other websites. In many instances, you may have to go to officially sanctioned websites, such as Sony’s Station Exchange, in order to get your goodies. Why? Because this could be another profitable source of income for MMORPG providers.

The economics of gaming is a fascinating subject which has just begun to be explored. Here are some interesting starting points:

Lastowka, F. G. & Hunter, D. The Laws of Virtual Worlds

Taylor, T. L.  Whose Game is this Anyway?

Klang, M. Avatar: From Deity to Corporate Property

Posted on by mklang

Propaganda, but it's well written

Via Boing Boing I came across to Oscartorrents.com which is a new game from the people at The Pirate Bay. Basically its a search engine for films from this year’s Oscar nominees. But my favourite part is a piece of colorful, but well written propaganda filed under the heading ‘Legal’ Notice

To all intellectual property landlords: we are aware that OscarTorrents might annoy you — but contain your righteous indignation for a while, and think: we’re only linking to torrents that already exist. Face it: your membrane has burst, and it wasn’t us who burst it. Your precious bodily fluids are escaping.

You haven’t beaten us, so why not join us? Think of a new business model that doesn’t involve overpriced pieces of plastic and skanky cinemas hawking cheap carbohydrates while relying on $6/hr projectionists who can’t keep a film in focus — not to mention insulting your audiences by (to pick a few examples) surveilling us with nightvision glasses, searching bags, 30 minutes of commercials and bombarding us with ridiculous anti-piracy propaganda. Take a look at yourselves. Is it really any wonder we’re winning?

You got to hand it to them, they sure know how to annoy the people they dislike. They also know how to hit the right buttons.

Posted on by mklang

Oh, Shit

I cannot believe it. It’s 28 degrees in Mumbai and I have managed to catch a cold. A summer cold is tiring thing to have but this is made worse by the fact that we have several days worth of meetings left and a conference at the end. Not to mention the long flight home.

The meeting today is particularly lively moving from philosophy of copyright (and in extension property), learning and teaching. The crux of the discussion is what is it we are attempting to achieve. Purity for purities sake or striving for higher principles.

The settings of the day are the Tata Institute for Fundamental Research (TIFR Colaba) at the most southern end of Mumbai. The research center is set within the Naval base which therefore increases security but it also has a beautiful garden by the sea.

Posted on by mklang

Video Campaigns and Responses

Starbucks and the government of Ethiopia have been discussing the trademark rights to some of the finest coffee in the world. The root of the conflict is that Starbucks has not recognised Ethiopia’s ownership of the Sidamo, Harar and Yirgacheffe names. (BBC News 26 October & 30 November 2006).

Oxfam began a campaign against Starbucks in order to help the Ethiopian coffee farmers. The idea is that if Starbucks signs the agreement with the Ethiopian intellectual property office the Ethiopian farmers will have more control over their products and this will result in better prices.

The Oxfam campaign is a typical online/offline mix with physical demonstrations being augmented with an information website containing documentation, photographs etc, and an â??act nowâ?? part where individuals can get involved on their own. A textbook example of an information campaign.

Oxfam have also created a video shot from their â??The Starbucks Day of Actionâ?? on December 16. The most natural place to leave a video on the Internet today is on the site YouTube so naturally Oxfam posted their video on YouTube (Watch it here). The video features demonstrators explaining their views and the positive reactions of people they meet.

What is interesting is not that the Internet is being used in this way but rather the Starbucks response. Starbucks created their own video response on December 20th  featuring the Head of Starbucks Coffee team answering questions. They too posted their video on YouTube (watch the Starbucks response on YouTube).

What is unique about the whole story is the way in which Starbucks as a corporation reacted to the unconventional protest use of YouTube. By responding in kind they showed that they understand the way in which information is created and consumed on the Internet.

Digital video cameras – and in particular mobile phone video cameras – have made the documentation of resistance a necessity. Websites such as YouTube and Google video have created an infrastructure for sharing of the results. By removing the need for camera crews, production teams and broadcast capabilities the creation and distribution of film has fallen into the hands of the creative amateur. The implications of this is that both the protesters and their corporate targets need to quickly master and use this medium of communication.

Whatever the outcome of the Oxfam campaign â?? this is the future of resistance information warfare.

Posted on by mklang

Resistance Fashion

Resistance to fashion is a topic that occasionally appears. Such resistance can take the form of animal rights activists protesting against the fur trade (e.g. Coalition to abolish the fur trade), it can take the form of protests against the use of anorectic models (e.g. the Spanish Association in Defense of Attention for Anorexia and Bulimia has managed to obtain the world’s first ban on overly thin models at a top-level fashion show in Madrid), or it can deal with protests against the conditions of workers in the textile trade (the most famous example must be Naomi Kleinâ??s work No Logo)

But what about the fashion of resistance? This is can be seen both as a reflection on what is fashionable to resist at any given time and as the actual fashion statement of the resister. The former is a fascinating subject since the world attention is fickle. The focus of popular attention varies even if the reason for resistance may remain â?? maybe a book here for someone to edit? (nudge, nudge).

However, it is the latter which is the focus of this post. Fashion and style can in themselves be both a form and a symbol of resistance. Styles of dress such as punk and hiphop are seen as resistance to the norm â?? punk went even further since its purpose was to provoke.

But even in the less extreme resistance has a fashion. Styles which identify, unite and exclude. Occasionally these styles establish themselves in the mainstream and there ability to provoke/resist are almost lost. One such controversial symbol is the image of Che Geuvara. On 5th of March 1960 Alberto â??Kordaâ?? Gutierrez took two pictures of Che Guevara. In 1967 the Italian publisher Giangiacomo Feltrinelli received two copies of the famous print at no cost.

Che by Korda

Feltrinelli started making posters from the prints with the notice â??Copyright Feltrinelliâ?? down in the corner. The image was on itâ??s way to become an international icon â?? it has been transformed, transplanted, transmitted and transfigured all over the world. Korda never received a penny. For one reason only – Cuba had not signed the Berne Convention. Fidel Castro described the protection of intellectual property as imperialistic â??bullshitâ??.

Since then the image has gone from being a symbol of resistance and revolution to being a fashion statement. Today the image has achieved iconic status and is (ab)used on everything from posters to carpets. The image has even had an exhibition at the Victoria and Albert Museum in London. The question therefore, as symbolized, by the Che icon is: How does an iconic symbol of resistance spread to a mass audience without becoming pop-culture and lacking in the symbolic value which was the original purpose? Or is resistance fashion a paradox since once it becomes a fashion it loses its resistance quality?

Posted on by mklang

Cool Job

Looking for a really cool job? How about working for the Electronic Frontier Foundation in Brussels…

EFF Seeks European Affairs Co-ordinator

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is looking for a European
staffer to head up our new Brussels office and round out our
international team. This is a new position focused on European
Community level intellectual property and civil liberties policy
initiatives that impact the digital environment. The position will be
part policy analyst, part activist and part educator.

We are looking for a motivated and dynamic European with:

– excellent written and spoken English language skills, and fluency
in another relevant language (preferably French or German or another
major European language);
– well-developed public speaking and social skills, who can talk with
a wide range of audiences including European MEPs and Commission
staff, consumer rights and public interest groups, computer
programmers and media;
-familiarity with current European Community IP and civil liberties
legislative and policy developments;
– a solid understanding of the European Community’s structure, main
fora, decision-making processes and key personnel and committees that
work in the IP and civil liberties arenas;
– strong policy analysis skills;
– a good strategic sense;
– maturity of judgment;
– demonstrated ability to meet deadlines and work with others
remotely; and
– the ability to travel throughout Europe, and to the United States.

EFF is passionate about our mission, and our ideal candidate will be
too. We work on cutting-edge issues in a fun, fast-paced team
environment. Salary and details of benefits package available on
request.

Applicants: please send a cover letter and resume in TXT, RTF, ODT,
DOC, PDF or html format to eurocoordinator@eff.org

Deadline for applications: Rolling, but not later than December 1, 2006.

No, I am not planning to apply. But it would be a really cool challenge…

Posted on by mklang

What is wrong with DRM?

What is wrong with DRM?

Most people tend to steer clear of three letter acronyms that they donâ??t immediately understand. DRM (Digital Rights Management) began as a vision of using technology to ensure that owners of intellectual property could maintain control over their property.  In other words it would be impossible to do that which was illegal. So far so good. Making it impossible to do that which is illegal is good. Frustrating illegal behaviour is right.

The problem is that DRM can also prevent behaviour that is not illegal.

A current example is the media player â??Zuneâ?? from Microsoft.

To maintain control over the music stored in the media player Zune is designed to limit music sharing. If music is shared between friends it can only be played three times or stored for three days.

The problem occurs when the music shared is either (1) not copyrighted, (2) in the public domain, or (3) shared with permission.

Supposing you create a song. Really. Or maybe a you create a snappy little limerick. You send it wirelessly to a friend. After three days. Or your friend plays it three times â?? it is gone. This is because Zune wraps all music which is sent in this way in DRM nomatter the rights you have as a creator or listener.

Therefore Microsoft Zune limits the legitimate rights of the user in an effort to comply with or control intellectual property. This is bad.

But wait â?? it is worse!

In the book 1984, Orwell introduces a method of control through the language called Newspeak. The idea was that by limiting the meaning of words we the party in power would eventually limit the way in which the citizens think. In the book the example given was that the term free would loose all connections with freedom and only be used with the idea to be rid of something. The example in the book is that a dog will be free of lice. But the concept of freedom as liberty will be lost.

This is the most damaging part of DRM systems. By controlling what is physically possible they create amongst the users an illusion of what can be done. A technical limitation to our use becomes a law of nature. Copying becomes bad not because it is illegal but because it is impossible.

Therefore by controlling the physical reality the manufacturers of DRM are slowly changing the way in which we see what is possible and impossible. In extension this will also limit our ability to envision what could be possible.

Posted on by mklang

Whats Cooking? Norms Based Property Regimes

Somehow, somewhere along the line our society has decided that certain types of intellectual endeavour were worth protecting and encouraging. Not all types. Just some. Through brilliant social positioning and political lobbying these intellectual endeavours have achieved the status of property. (For more on this read No Trespassing â?? Eva Hemmungs Wirtén).

Stop! Think! Property. Property is usually considered amongst the human rights. The focus on property right occasionally risked upsetting the balance of rights and encroaching on other rights. This led Martin Luther King to write:

Property is intended to serve life, and no matter how much we surround it with rights and respect, it has no personal being. It is part of the earth man walks on. It is not man.

Despite the fact that intellectual property protection as we understand it today is not as old as many believe, we have managed to raise it to an eternal value. This is to say we believe that this is the way that it always has been. Implicit with this idea comes the follow-up thought that changing this is not worth the effort.

The interesting thing is that there are many types of knowledge that is not protected by intellectual property. Some of these are not valuable but others are extremely valuable.

A personâ??s honour is something that may be painstakingly built up over a lifetime within the community group. Whether this person is a diamond trader or part of a criminal organisation this is a valuable commodity, which is unprotected. Defamation law attempts to cover certain parts â?? but this protection has nowhere near the far-reaching effects of intellectual property.

A farmerâ??s knowledge over the terrain and weather, a craftsmanâ??s knowledge of tools and materials and a teachers experience are all valuable commodities in the daily life of these people.

My current favourite example comes from an article by Emmanuelle Fauchart and Eric von Hippel (his books are available online free) about the value of the knowledge of French chefs. Especially in their struggle to gain and maintain Michelin stars.

A star in the Michelin Guide is a valuable commodity. It makes and breaks restaurants and the career of chefs. It has also been the source of some scandals (wikipedia).

The question the article poses is why when the commodity is so valuable donâ??t chefs copy each other? Rather than innovate and surpass their competitors why not emulate? There is no law, no intellectual property in food dishes. Despite the fact that they are highly creative. The answer, according to Fauchart and von Hippel lies in â??norms basedâ?? intellectual property systems.

What we see is regulation by advanced group norms that allow the group to:

â?¦specify the nature and extent of rights that a group member can assert to intellectual property. They also include procedures for the claiming of intellectual property rights, and community-accepted types of sanctions for violators.

This is a thought-provoking article. We need more work in this vein to be able to show that the present intellectual property regime is far from being the only game in town.

Posted on by mklang

Three Judges & a Prosecutor

OK so itâ??s not really about judges and prosecutors. The date for my thesis defence looms closer and I thought that I might introduce you all to my three judges and my prosecutor. Actually itâ??s my examination board and my discussant.

My discussant is Professor Jonny Holmström from the Department of Informatics at Umeå University. He has worked diverse areas from IT innovations within organisations to file sharing. I have not met him yet.

My examination board consists of three people: Ulf Petrusson, Agneta Ranerup and Jan Jörnmark.

Professor Ulf Petrusson is Director of the Center for Intellectual Property Studies and wrote his thesis on the patent strategies â?? he continues working in the field of intellectual property strategies. He was also my teacher in my introduction to intellectual property when I was an undergraduate many, many years ago.

Agneta Ranerup is an Associate Professor at my own department. She has worked in the field of eDemocracy in particular the use of web-based service in the citizens choice of governmental and quasi-governmental services. Her work points to the fact that design choices play an important role in democracy.

Jan J̦rnmark is an Associate Professor at the Department of Economic History at G̦teborg University. He is also affiliated with Chalmers Рthe technical university in G̦teborg. He has done work on globalisation and also technology. He also has an interest in deserted places. I have met him on a few occasions.

So these are the main actors in the process â?? along with the audience and me. This is a good group so the process should be an interesting one. It should be a nice affair â?? Feel free to drop by if youâ??re in town.

Georges Rouault – The Three Judges circa 1936
Posted on by mklang

The ungood system of academic publishing

Another text on Free Software that I have written has been accepted for publication. This is good news. But then I read the rather draconian copyright and licensing rules which the publisher wants to apply to my text.

Basically the ideas remain mine but if I want to present them I have to re-write the ideas from scratch.

The author retains the rights to any intellectual property developed â?¦While the author may use any and all thoughts and research results developed or accumulated while working on a manuscript, and may rewrite, update, and re-title them for use in other publications, â?¦ the author CANNOT use the verbatim text of the manuscript or any part thereofâ?¦without first obtaining the written permissionâ?¦

From my limited experience this wording is pretty standard. From the academics point of view I â??needâ?? publications. But the situation becomes strange when the topic I am writing about is Free Software which has a large focus on openness and the freedom of ideas.

Let me just point out from the start â?? there is no limitation on the reader to read and develop the ideas. They just cannot slavishly copy the text.

My niggling concern is the fact that I am paid by an organisation to do research (and teach). So I spend my time gathering information and thinking about the implications of what is occurring in my particular field. I may even have applied for public grants to do this work.

Once I write down my thoughts the only way for the others to gain access to them is for my library to buy the book so that others can read it. Which basically means my university is paying twice for this information. First for me to think/write and then to obtain physical access to the information.

Even though I dislike the contents of the copyright agreement I have just signed it did not prevent me from signing it. The problem is one of incentive structures. Had I written the work and then just posted it to my website â?? it would not have been worth anything to my academic peers and therefore to my academic career.

The academic text only becomes valuable after it passes through the quality control system which is in the hands of the publisher. Without a publishing house behind the text the information contained therein is not seen as knowledgeâ?¦

Posted on by mklang