Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Free software
Free software
"Free software or software libre is software that can be used, studied, and modified without restriction, and which can be copied and redistributed in modified or unmodified form either without restriction, or with minimal restrictions only to ensure that further recipients can also do these things and that manufacturers of consumer-facing hardware allow user modifications to their hardware. Free software is available gratis (free of charge) in most cases." wikipedia.org
5 software programs
Ubuntu: A computor operating system
Open Office: An office suite, simelar to Microsoft Office
GIMP: Image editing
Blender: 3D animation software
Wikimedia Foundation: Reference material
The Future of Software Is Open Source from l0ckergn0me on Vimeo.
"The Future of Software Is Open Source" by L0ckergn0me posted on Vimeo.com
"Free software or software libre is software that can be used, studied, and modified without restriction, and which can be copied and redistributed in modified or unmodified form either without restriction, or with minimal restrictions only to ensure that further recipients can also do these things and that manufacturers of consumer-facing hardware allow user modifications to their hardware. Free software is available gratis (free of charge) in most cases." wikipedia.org
5 software programs
Ubuntu: A computor operating system
Open Office: An office suite, simelar to Microsoft Office
GIMP: Image editing
Blender: 3D animation software
Wikimedia Foundation: Reference material
The Future of Software Is Open Source from l0ckergn0me on Vimeo.
"The Future of Software Is Open Source" by L0ckergn0me posted on Vimeo.com
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Copy right case studies..
Case study 1.
After first listening to the two songs ("My Sweet Lord" by George Hassison and "He's So Fine" written by Rolnald Muck, Performed by The Chiffons) I really struggled to hear any similarities between them and couldn't see how this could be a case of copyright infringement. Only after listening to them over and over, back and forth I began to hear quite strong similarities in motifs....
I can't decide what I think the case outcome should be, but do believe that if George Harrison did copy parts of the song he did it unintentionally and subconciously... Although the two songs have some very very similar motifs, they are still two very different songs... I can understand that the artists do not want their songs copied in any way, even subconciously, but I think it may be a little too far to charge someone with an entirely and honestly subconcious infringement of copyright.
Case Study 2.
Yes I believe it is clearly and obviously the same chair that Woods had drawn. Everything about this interogation room setting in "12 Monkeys" is almost identicle to Woods' drawing. The objects, the arrangement, the tones, even the mood.. I'm not atall surprised by this cases outcome.
Case Study 3.
Yes I dp believe Keir Smith's work is Illegal. He has clearly and intentionally breached copyright laws. He has taken used audio and video works which are protected under copyright laws. I find the most "dodgy" parts of Keir's work to be the use of trademark symbols and names like "20th Century Fox" because I see them as recognisable "stamps" which show ownership of the film, its production and its content. For someone to come along and take that stamp and use it for themselves is what I call dodgy.. its unnecessary.. I see that Keir is just using it to make a point, but if he were to succeed and everyone were allowed to use such trademarks legally, I believe it could and would seriously confuse things............ the idea of ownership and recognition would go completely out the window.......... and I don't think that's a good idea............ I do believe tho', that some copyright issues are a bit extreme... to think you could so easily get in so much trouble and all the law suits and possible money owed......... just because you filmed your infant chid bopping around to Prince............. that is just crazy............................I think Keir's ideas and message are right............ but he may have taken it a little too far......... a can't see how his film would become legal any time soon..........
After first listening to the two songs ("My Sweet Lord" by George Hassison and "He's So Fine" written by Rolnald Muck, Performed by The Chiffons) I really struggled to hear any similarities between them and couldn't see how this could be a case of copyright infringement. Only after listening to them over and over, back and forth I began to hear quite strong similarities in motifs....
I can't decide what I think the case outcome should be, but do believe that if George Harrison did copy parts of the song he did it unintentionally and subconciously... Although the two songs have some very very similar motifs, they are still two very different songs... I can understand that the artists do not want their songs copied in any way, even subconciously, but I think it may be a little too far to charge someone with an entirely and honestly subconcious infringement of copyright.
Case Study 2.
Yes I believe it is clearly and obviously the same chair that Woods had drawn. Everything about this interogation room setting in "12 Monkeys" is almost identicle to Woods' drawing. The objects, the arrangement, the tones, even the mood.. I'm not atall surprised by this cases outcome.
Case Study 3.
Yes I dp believe Keir Smith's work is Illegal. He has clearly and intentionally breached copyright laws. He has taken used audio and video works which are protected under copyright laws. I find the most "dodgy" parts of Keir's work to be the use of trademark symbols and names like "20th Century Fox" because I see them as recognisable "stamps" which show ownership of the film, its production and its content. For someone to come along and take that stamp and use it for themselves is what I call dodgy.. its unnecessary.. I see that Keir is just using it to make a point, but if he were to succeed and everyone were allowed to use such trademarks legally, I believe it could and would seriously confuse things............ the idea of ownership and recognition would go completely out the window.......... and I don't think that's a good idea............ I do believe tho', that some copyright issues are a bit extreme... to think you could so easily get in so much trouble and all the law suits and possible money owed......... just because you filmed your infant chid bopping around to Prince............. that is just crazy............................I think Keir's ideas and message are right............ but he may have taken it a little too far......... a can't see how his film would become legal any time soon..........
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)