IP in 480

Great discussion today in 480 to kick off our IP week! While I’ve done my homework as far as IP is concerned, I’m not an expert by any means, so I look to external resources for help. For those looking for more background, try my del.icio.us. The Stanford Fair Use site which Jason brought up today is super, and it covers far more than fair use. Or you can go right to the source.

Try a Google search for “copyright resource” on .edu sites; this will turn up a lot of university copyright centers. These folks often have good introductory stuff online.

As an aside, I want to ask Julie and other folks who have had success nuking Blogger spam to comment a bit (or email me) about how they did it; a few people are still having problems, and I want to help them out. (Update 10/18: This isn’t just us; Mark Cuban writes about Blogger spam problems; as does Netcraft.)

This entry was posted in 480. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to IP in 480

  1. Julie Veile says:

    I mainly just followed the suggestions you gave me to reduce/stop getting spam on my blog on Blogger.com.

    1) On Blogger.com, go into “Settings” and then pick the tab “Comments.” Under “Who Can Comment?” select “Only Registered Users.” This obviously means that anonymous users will not be able to comment on your blog. (So, if your friends don’t have a blogger account, they won’t be able to comment.)

    2) Scroll down further on that page to the question that asks, “Show Word Verification for Comments?” Select YES and this will add a captcha (the thing where people have to copy a series of letters) onto your comment screen. So, bots shouldn’t be able to comment on your page, because they can’t copy letters.


    3) If you get spam on your blog, delete it! There should be a little garbage can icon next to everyone’s comments, and you don’t have to keep the ones you don’t want. This won’t stop spam, but it will keep it from annoying you, I guess.

    Good luck!

  2. JMercury says:

    I agree, I guess today was pretty exciting, the discussion was lively, people were taking numbers. It’s too bad the group is not as lively all the time. CBD, I’m glad you were excited about today, after your previous entry I hope things start to evolve.


  3. Kate says:

    The main way I got rid of them was through the word verification. It’s kind of a pain sometimes, but it has really helped. I haven’t got any spam since I put it on there almost from the first spam comment.

  4. Nick says:

    Do IP laws work? I read or heard about this kid in highschool who took a large portion of text from a still living writers book. When the writer tried to sue, the kid (or, at least, his lawyer) claimed that the information was all common knowledge. The writer fought, claiming that he was trying to protect his writing style, but lost because the lawyer cited several other writers with a similar style as the suing writer. If you take a passage from my text and a passage from Dilger’s text and passage from each of the other students, can you tell who wrote what? We should experiment in class. I doubt we differ much. In fact, chances are we could put together a very consistent general essay by taking passages from our blogs and slapping them together.

  5. cbd says:

    Julie and Kate, thanks.

    Jason, I’m optimistic: I think we’ll continue to have good conversations, here and in class.

    Nick, I think the short answer is “No” for many people. But we have to ask why it’s no. The RIAA will say “no” because _____ is killing the ____ industry. McLeod, Lessig, etc. would say “no” because of chilling effects on creastors or the continued erosion of the public domain. Etc. Regardless, issues of style, ideas, and expression are all a lot less clearly defined as far as the laws are concerned than they used to be.

  6. Kyle says:

    Is the main point of this open source initiative with regards to software to allow software to evolve and adapt more quickly then in the past? I read an article (http://www.opensource.org/) that talked about how if programmers have the ability to make changes to software that they could fix problems & make improvments to software in a fraction of the time that conventional software developers can. But why is that, what makes open source easier to see problems with software? Is it the fact that more people can make changes to the software? Also if anyone is allowed to modify software than doesn’t that leave the possibility of people making negative changes to software? Is it possible to have semi-open source software?

  7. cbd says:

    Kyle, great questions to talk more about tomorrow. The same questions could be asked for Creative Commons license stuff: does the fact that folks are giving away their blog postings make a difference?

    Briefly, I’ll say I see two advantages to open source: (1) because the code is publicly available, there’s no guessing about what’s in it. You can just look. Without access to code, you have no idea why, for example, a browser has a security hole, or an application keeps crashing. (2) It encourages folks to work together. Why reinvent the wheel, when you can just get someone else’s wheel?

Comments are closed.