The internet has made the sharing and remixing of content into a common pastime but copyright laws, first designed more than 400 years ago, have not kept up. Creative Commons attempts to change that and this week the organisation published a guide, The Power of Open, that shows exactly how the system works.
Joi Ito, the chair of Creative Commons, told the Telegraph: “If you think about the success of the internet, it allows people to innovate without asking permission.” He said that existing copyright was an obstacle to that and so Creative Commons provided a way to let creators control their rights without stifling innovation.
Creative Commons works by providing a framework for people to specify how their work can be used. Creators can use the Creative Commons website to choose the licence they want and generate the HTML code to include on their own website.
The licences can allow people to copy it, remix it and share it and set various conditions under which those things can be done, for example allowing only non-commercial use of their work or allowing use only if they are credited as the source.
Ito said that a more open system would drive innovation. He said: “Closed is a good way to focus [on a new idea]. When you’re open you’ve got a lot of cooks in the kitchen.” But he added: “I think open wins in the end.”The Power of Free focuses on a range of people and organisations who have used Creative Commons to build their businesses and spread their work. They include publishers such as Bloomsbury Academic, musicians such as Curt Smith and authors such as James Patrick Kelly.
Jonathan Worth, a photographer, told the Telegraph how he had used Creative Commons successfully. He has found that people have continued to buy images from him even when they are available free online.
He said: “Free, in and of itself, is not a business model. It’s a part of a business model.”
Lisa Green, chief of staff for Creative Commons, said that the licensing made possible new business models. She told the Telegraph that the existing system had failed because people saw the world as “either the chaos of piracy or the lockdown”. She added: “But the lockdown doesn’t work and it wouldn’t work even if it was ideal.”
She said the more open approach of Creative Commons “may be changing the economy but it’s not destroying the economy”.
In the pharmaceuticals industry, for example, Green said that many companies were working together on clinical trials because it spread the cost of failure and that’s more desirable than jealously guarding your intellectual property. Once the trials are complete, however, the companies would go back to work on their separate products.
Ito makes the point that as products become more complex, more people need to share the intellectual property. That sharing happens first within companies and then between companies. As the net makes more connections possible, it’s possible to innovate even more by sharing the intellectual property more widely.
Creative Commons was founded 10 years ago by American academics Lawrence Lessig and Hal Abelson and publisher Eric Eldred. Since then it has gradually grown its profile. It’s used by major websites such as Wikipedia and Flickr, for example. However, even outside those circles there is a growing awareness that the current system isn’t working.
In November last year, David Cameron announced a review of Britain’s intellectual property laws to “make them fit for the internet age”. The resulting Hargreaves Review recommended significant changes but stopped short of calling for the ‘fair use’ provisions that American copyright law offers.
Whether or not British copyright law is re-written, the flexibility of Creative Commons is likely to ensure its usefulness. And Lisa Green stresses that the importance of Creative Commons is as an add-on to copyright and not a replacement for it. In fact, it’s the existence of copyright law that makes Creative Commons enforceable. “It relies on the teeth of copyright,” says Green.
Jonathan Worth, a photographer, told the Telegraph how he had used Creative Commons successfully. He has found that people have continued to buy images from him even when they are available free online.
He said: “Free, in and of itself, is not a business model. It’s a part of a business model.”
Lisa Green, chief of staff for Creative Commons, said that the licensing made possible new business models. She told the Telegraph that the existing system had failed because people saw the world as “either the chaos of piracy or the lockdown”. She added: “But the lockdown doesn’t work and it wouldn’t work even if it was ideal.”
She said the more open approach of Creative Commons “may be changing the economy but it’s not destroying the economy”.
In the pharmaceuticals industry, for example, Green said that many companies were working together on clinical trials because it spread the cost of failure and that’s more desirable than jealously guarding your intellectual property. Once the trials are complete, however, the companies would go back to work on their separate products.
Ito makes the point that as products become more complex, more people need to share the intellectual property. That sharing happens first within companies and then between companies. As the net makes more connections possible, it’s possible to innovate even more by sharing the intellectual property more widely.
Creative Commons was founded 10 years ago by American academics Lawrence Lessig and Hal Abelson and publisher Eric Eldred. Since then it has gradually grown its profile. It’s used by major websites such as Wikipedia and Flickr, for example. However, even outside those circles there is a growing awareness that the current system isn’t working.
In November last year, David Cameron announced a review of Britain’s intellectual property laws to “make them fit for the internet age”. The resulting Hargreaves Review recommended significant changes but stopped short of calling for the ‘fair use’ provisions that American copyright law offers.
Whether or not British copyright law is re-written, the flexibility of Creative Commons is likely to ensure its usefulness. And Lisa Green stresses that the importance of Creative Commons is as an add-on to copyright and not a replacement for it. In fact, it’s the existence of copyright law that makes Creative Commons enforceable. “It relies on the teeth of copyright,” says Green.
0 comments:
Post a Comment