Watch videos with subtitles in your language, upload your videos, create your own subtitles! Click here to learn more on "how to Dotsub"

La Belleza del Copyleft

0 (0 Likes / 0 Dislikes)
I think that in the next season of we must continue with Creative Commons licenses And we should take a step forward and dare us with the [Creative Commons] 3.0 instead the 2.5 one 3.0? What is Copyleft? I saw that in several blogs, but i don't see it clearly, ¿eh? Please, Explain me what is Creative Commons. Well... I am not an expert in that subject, but i know that Copyright control author's rights and normally autor or rights holder reserves him/herself (all) these rights. Instead, Copyleft assign some of this rights Some. Not all! Organization that had invented them is called "Creative Commons" and i think that it exists since 2001. And, how they expect from Copyleft? It was founded by a group of 'intellectual property' experts that realize Copyright serves to the physical world but not for Internet. They thought that nowaday's creators need more adequated, easy-to-use tools. We could call it: "Licences for the digital world" Any author can protect his/her work through internet with Creative Commons. But the better thing is that we can share our copy with another people while some use conditions are respected A lot of commercial contents that people thinks... I don't know how to call us... ourselves but we are like "anti author rights". We are not anti author rights! We are pro election! One of the things that were happened in each side one have created one image of the other and them see (one to another) like conflicting A lot of people in Internet thought that all profesionals and the people in the media are bad what is not true. There are a lot of people in large enterprises at this moment working with user generated content. This is a very important moment to sit down and talk very useful things, and there are a great amount of solutions that we don't have imagined before. Original author's rights law is not adequated for world where we live. It moves in a wrong direction So there is 2 measures to take: Participate in the economy: Probing that sharing is better that don't sharing Once proved the model... Wikipedia is a good example, that sharing really generates value. I don't want to measure only money but if we pay attention only to economic terms if them let sharing total value of society will increase in some mesurements. If they can measure that, then is easy to make calculations about if we change copyright law this make all easier a lot. I see. I knew that you was talking about Wikipedia It can work in online projects of colective inteligence, but to write a book, to compose a song or to make a movie are different things. If we let that users can copy, download or modify content, How can we have the return of the inversion of 1000s of Euros? How we can pay bills, you pretty? You are always with the same! Is the only matter of your interest the money? Well, then you can tell me how to pay bills. Then, let that Joi ito explains that to you. People is starting to understand that in marketing user is necessary, but them don't realize that it treats about a package. It can't be half-open or have-closed, you know And... they still bring to us their old models This is a literacy matter, and to turn it into an success case. Nine Inch Nails... when they launch "Ghost", them give music under a Creative Commons license. and.. they made 1.600.000 dollars in a week. This is a matter about the creation of some success cases and show to enterprises, why they have control of all too usually We can't to take absolute control But there is a lot of profit then still aren't be able to measure and it treats about experiment and to learn from it. Then can we to protect our contents and to let to the others that they use them or commercially exploit them? Is that not a contradiction? Wait First, we define what rights we are ready to grant Then we choose a license that is composed by 4 conditions. In this way, we inform to the user what he or she can do and what he or she can't do. over that imposing conditions! First condition is the "Author's attribution" If someone use one of our videos should attribute and communicate that the author is Balzac TV. Then, we must think if we want that user can modify or adapt content in order to make a new work. This is called: "Derivative Work" Let Derivative Works! Of course. And letting they steal the original idea! A lot of the bigger advances and invents in the history, we could call it in this way, were 'stolen ideas'. They saw that idea anywhere specially Edison had a tour all over the world visiting Expositions and Fairs... and he was literally collecting ideas and sending them by telegraph to his engineers at home saying: "Look how we can turn this in a product" Here we can see 2 important things: The most important one is access to information. So without that Fairs, Edison would not see (collect) these ideas. He had to have access to the information. Do you see it? 'To Copy' has always a part in culture and innovation history To let transforming a work, is a step to favor creativity But we are not in the Edison time, you beautiful! World had evolved.. ...and in one global economy with an enormous competition, we should have protection mechanisms. Yes, of course, we have evolved But more protection also means more control. I don't want "control" our audience Quite the opposite. I want them use our work to produce their versions. Look, under Creative Commons license we can conditionate them to continue sharing with the same conditions. This condition is called: "ShareAlike" Initial idea is changing about patent rights, (the initial idea) was to grant rights to commercially exploit an idea to somebody who invents it, the inventor. But in exchange of rights of exclusive explotaition the was forced to open information in order to others can access it. Without copy it, but inspiring, building and innovating from this information. If we haven't knowledge moving anywhere, if we hide it then (society) cannot evolve. Its very simple, like money we know if money is not moving away, if it is hidden under the pillow, by people in their houses, money don't have do its job with efficiency. The same occurs with knowledge: Only if it moves away can create value. Ok, lady, but if all people share online, noone pays the price, and copy has no value, What future have online distribution? You know what is happening with music... Please!! if you know like me that nowadays is consumed and produced more music than ever. Look: iTunes, Spotify, Last fm... they work! Now, Internet have the same role that had before TV or the radio in their age. They help us to discover what we like. The crude reality is that a lot of people of the music industry will not be there in the future, because they can't understand how can the reach B from A. They can't understand consumers. There were a billion( people sharing though Internet. And sharing is the great impulse to a sell Of course, they would send all people to prison if they would can do that, or they would take away our (internet) connection for sharing files. what is a paradox Movie insutry is more advanced here because they always made money by means of the movie shows in cinemas, flights or prisons. This is not a problem to them if them have more return: They will income more money! But, how can we monetize that supposed extra show? One of the most important things nowadays is to get people attention. Their time. Are so huge number of things happened that the most important is to get their attention, because when you have their attention, then you have their money. Music industry always had been very strict in copy protection. What is useless. We can't to do that in a tecnical way, we would have to return to a policial state. Pay-per-music should be created inside the sistem itself. If you change to a (new) house, pipes are already there, but you pay for use water, but if you don't use a lot of water, then it will not cost a lot of money to you. You know that you are paying, right? If you fill your swimming pool daily, you will pay more. But there is not a permission to access to water. We need a permission for music for using streaming, like in the case of water, but in Internet. Each time you connect permission is granted (previously). Exact! Can you see it now? You pay a subscription or one fixed rate and you access to content anytime and anywhere. That could be a model for Balzac! Don't be so naive! Why someone will pay us if they can 'pirate' our videos? You negative! No all people turn into a pirate by turn on the computer. And, secondly: People pays to receive a differential value. Something extra. Like what, for example? From active participation to decide the type of the content.. to.. I don't know... the exploitation of the product. Can you imagine that? One TV or one enterprise using Balzac contents? ", from the web to your sitting room" And Creative Commons anticipate that? Yes. The user that pays a suscription have granted commercial use and derivative works. Always he, she (or them) share it in the same way. Ant this in spain is called. Attribution Share Alike 3.0 License The truth is that it's hard to imagine. To see what Hector will say about it ... I don't think that Creative Commons could the piracy ... And you agree that piracy destroys culture. Come on! Do not belive everything. There are viable business models that you called piracy. Take a look at the music industry of Brazil, for example. Brazil? Brazil! Brazilian music has really escaped the companies during the years. The real brazilian music has escaped of their control. It's s in the hands of the people. In the hands of "Do it yourself." That's the main part. Although companies have the political power, this power has no basis. If you count the number of CD's that Sony BMG, Universal, EMI, has released this year is very small. I mean 10 or 15 CD's every year in Brazil. That's nothing. Brazil has more than 180 milion people and a lot are musicians. So basically what happens is a big failure to show the Brazilian culture in the traditional industry. The interesting thing is that the scenes do not depend on exclusive rights. Do not rely on what we think about copyright. It's actually the opposite. The more you spread their music, more economically viable will be. They make money with live concerts, playing in at the "Sound system parties", in the clubs, is their main source of income. But there is much more than that. They also make money selling their CD's, not just what they sell in the street, but the ones after a concert. What we discovered is that the market of selling CD's of concerts, do not competes with the market of the other CD's. It's a different product, a different situation. Another important point is that this scene is multimillionaire. We are not talking about peanuts. We are talking about some artists that have planes. See? You can make money even having fun without resort to the absolute control of the rights. The main point is is creating a different value. Something that does not rely solely of the sale of the copy. Something like this that have been made this brazilian musicians. Let's see where we are on our private jet to the filming. Let's see.... Well... I'm leaving, I'm meeting Hector and I'm going to tell him his idea. My point is: It's not a local phenomenon It's a global phenomenon. And this music is emerging It's more popular than ever. So when I say this is about the music of the periphery, might suggest that is out there who is listening. But reallity is different. Because that is becoming the most popular music on the planet, making us the edge of the periphery in cultural therms. Because the only people who are not are listening and paying attention at these scenes are us. While everyone else are having fun. ¡We are missing the party! You know what I mean? What a stubborn woman! he always tries to change things. Although it seems quite clear that Creative Commons is the future. Some examples almost convince myself. I think everybody should discuss this point. Slowly Step by step. And you... What do you think?

Video Details

Duration: 14 minutes and 54 seconds
Country: Spain
Language: Spanish (Spain)
Producer: Balzac Media S.L
Director: Hector Milla
Views: 260
Posted by: balzac on Jun 3, 2009

gina tost vs gina tost

Caption and Translate

    Sign In/Register for Dotsub to translate this video.