I really didn’t take sides, and still don’t have any desire to as I don’t see that as productive, but once the video was removed, attribution was offered for everything and the photo was removed, Hartwell pressed on, demanding payment for the original video.

I think the situation offers lessons for both copyright holders and those seeking to use content. What I would like to see is less hostility on the issue and more learning and understanding.

As far as emailing me goes, please feel free. I’d love to discuss anything with you that tripped your radar. My email address is in the sidebar. Just drop me a line any time and thank you for the discussion as well!

I really didn’t take sides, and still don’t have any desire to as I don’t see that as productive, but once the video was removed, attribution was offered for everything and the photo was removed, Hartwell pressed on, demanding payment for the original video.

I think the situation offers lessons for both copyright holders and those seeking to use content. What I would like to see is less hostility on the issue and more learning and understanding.

As far as emailing me goes, please feel free. I’d love to discuss anything with you that tripped your radar. My email address is in the sidebar. Just drop me a line any time and thank you for the discussion as well!

Funny because I thought The Richter Scales handled it very poorly and kind of forced her to go to the measures she did. If I remember reading correctly after she contacted them they basically told her to talk to their lawyer and brushed her off and forced her hand.

I read the people in The Richter Scales all had day jobs in the tech field but I still consider them “artists.” What ultimately made me side with Lane in the situation was that they ultimately took something created by a fellow artists and failed to at least get permission or give credit. I expect the average person to “steal” pics or the lazy eBay seller to take pics to illustrate a product but I expect better from other artists.

I don’t make a living from blogging or from selling stock photos because I don’t put enough time into it. But I make enough that if someone just takes what they want that how much I can make from it is impacted.

Anyway thanks for discussion. Another post of yours got me thinking about something that I’d like to email you about if that’s ok with you.

Funny because I thought The Richter Scales handled it very poorly and kind of forced her to go to the measures she did. If I remember reading correctly after she contacted them they basically told her to talk to their lawyer and brushed her off and forced her hand.

I read the people in The Richter Scales all had day jobs in the tech field but I still consider them “artists.” What ultimately made me side with Lane in the situation was that they ultimately took something created by a fellow artists and failed to at least get permission or give credit. I expect the average person to “steal” pics or the lazy eBay seller to take pics to illustrate a product but I expect better from other artists.

I don’t make a living from blogging or from selling stock photos because I don’t put enough time into it. But I make enough that if someone just takes what they want that how much I can make from it is impacted.

Anyway thanks for discussion. Another post of yours got me thinking about something that I’d like to email you about if that’s ok with you.

“And why do you suppose that few people are making their living from their work?”

As I said, it is because very few people make a living from their work under any business model. I have not yet found a business model for artists that works consistently for fails every time.

The failure rate for a small business is about 75%. I’d wager that rate is much higher for artists. That’s been true for centuries. The term “starving artist” predates the remix culture by hundreds of years.

That being said, the hypocrisy you point to is clear and something I’ve noticed. I can name a few sites that openly praise the remix culture but don’t participate in it. However, I won’t because there’s little to be gained from pointing out the obvious.

My criticism of Hartwell stemmed less from the fact that she didn’t want to join the remix culture, but more to the fact that she ignored fair use issues with the video and the distinct possibility that the use of the image was not an infringement. She was right to demand attribution, but I feel she overplayed her hand.

However, I have to agree that emotions got far too heated during that whole exchange. If there is one thing that I can definitely agree with Prof. Lessig on, it is that war achieves nothing.

The kind of dialog that was being hurled by both sides was uncalled for and added nothing to the debate. There is no argument from me on that point either.

“And why do you suppose that few people are making their living from their work?”

As I said, it is because very few people make a living from their work under any business model. I have not yet found a business model for artists that works consistently for fails every time.

The failure rate for a small business is about 75%. I’d wager that rate is much higher for artists. That’s been true for centuries. The term “starving artist” predates the remix culture by hundreds of years.

That being said, the hypocrisy you point to is clear and something I’ve noticed. I can name a few sites that openly praise the remix culture but don’t participate in it. However, I won’t because there’s little to be gained from pointing out the obvious.

My criticism of Hartwell stemmed less from the fact that she didn’t want to join the remix culture, but more to the fact that she ignored fair use issues with the video and the distinct possibility that the use of the image was not an infringement. She was right to demand attribution, but I feel she overplayed her hand.

However, I have to agree that emotions got far too heated during that whole exchange. If there is one thing that I can definitely agree with Prof. Lessig on, it is that war achieves nothing.

The kind of dialog that was being hurled by both sides was uncalled for and added nothing to the debate. There is no argument from me on that point either.

Lane Hartwell is the exception, not the rule.”

And why do you suppose that few people are making their living from their work? I would venture a guess it is because their work is diminished by this so-called remix culture and because so few people value the works of others. The thing I was getting at in the Lane example was how all of these high profile bloggers and sites expected her to give away her work all the while they have full copyright notices on their work. That’s beyond hypocrisy.

People taking images from the net for their own use when permission isn’t granted is an example of people having little value or respect for photography and photographers.

The thing that really bothered me about the Lane incident was how so many people were upset with her and trashed her because she didn’t want to be part of the “remix culture” that these techies have created. The level of vitriol and sexist comments leveled at her by people who believe in the remix culture was hideous. If that’s the kind of people you are associated with if you join this so-called revolution-I’d rather stay away.

@Dan
“I of course support author’s rights, I just question reliance on them as a business model.”

If they can’t be relied upon as a business model then what good are they? What purpose do they serve? And it is one thing to say you don’t agree with them as a business model but you don’t provide an alternative business model.

Giving something away in the hopes that you’ll get someone else to pay for it down the line doesn’t make much sense to me. Where is the incentive for a consumer to pay a creator for their product when the creator is known to give it away for free?

Without an alternative presented isn’t the comment and the sentiments of the post just a platitude?

Lane Hartwell is the exception, not the rule.”

And why do you suppose that few people are making their living from their work? I would venture a guess it is because their work is diminished by this so-called remix culture and because so few people value the works of others. The thing I was getting at in the Lane example was how all of these high profile bloggers and sites expected her to give away her work all the while they have full copyright notices on their work. That’s beyond hypocrisy.

People taking images from the net for their own use when permission isn’t granted is an example of people having little value or respect for photography and photographers.

The thing that really bothered me about the Lane incident was how so many people were upset with her and trashed her because she didn’t want to be part of the “remix culture” that these techies have created. The level of vitriol and sexist comments leveled at her by people who believe in the remix culture was hideous. If that’s the kind of people you are associated with if you join this so-called revolution-I’d rather stay away.

@Dan
“I of course support author’s rights, I just question reliance on them as a business model.”

If they can’t be relied upon as a business model then what good are they? What purpose do they serve? And it is one thing to say you don’t agree with them as a business model but you don’t provide an alternative business model.

Giving something away in the hopes that you’ll get someone else to pay for it down the line doesn’t make much sense to me. Where is the incentive for a consumer to pay a creator for their product when the creator is known to give it away for free?

Without an alternative presented isn’t the comment and the sentiments of the post just a platitude?

I would imagine the same or less number of people make a living selling non-customized content than make any money giving it away.

The tides of technology and culture are washing away the value of non-custom content. I of course support author’s rights, I just question reliance on them as a business model.