Assignment 2 Submissions

From Technologies and Politics of Control
Revision as of 10:23, 20 July 2009 by Lewis Johnsen (talk | contribs) (→‎Put Your Name And Pitch Here)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Put Your Name And Pitch Here

Ernest Owens

Pitch: Tech Branding: The Technology Impact on social creativity and Innovation

Technology is a key component in establishing a brand. Many individuals have a personal brand on myspace, facebook, twitter and many other social websites. Socially its almost imperative that you are connected to a social site. Information Technology is vital when branding innovation. If a company is not exactly connected to new media their position can deteriorate due to a lack of progressive maneuvering in technology. My project will focus on how technology is used to create awareness of a brand and also spark innovation. Areas of concentration will magnify on the social creativity of youth in their educational endeavors. Explore how branding can impact socially and how brand innovation such as a music artist adjusts to new media trends. I will explore how President Obama's campaign impacted his road to presidency by utilize technology to assist him.

Technology has a way to assist or harm a brand. This project will focus on the use of technology in branding and creative ways to innovate.

Reference Changing Culture in Music Obama and Technology 2.0


  • Name: Alek Sudan
  • Pitch: Integrated Educational Technologies


I would like to better understand how the application of Web 2.0 technologies may affect a small middle school’s education, community, and culture; examining both positive and adverse effects which may arise. There are three primary questions I would like to ask:


· How do you excite and enable children to learn?

· How do you excite and enable parents to participate and get involved?

· How can you maintain and grow a sense of school culture online?


  • Understanding a Student’s “Sense of Responsibility” and School Culture

How important a student values his or her education, provides clues to how they interact, learn, and their sense of responsibility. As a school struggles to meet the individual needs across the broad range of students, a curriculum “blanket” lowers the possible outcome.

Providing students, not only high-achievers or special needs, with the ability to develop a sense of responsibility may provide for an educational advantage. Integrating technology for guided learning (highly interactive, guided lessons) could benefit students. Tailoring this system to a student’s current lifestyles (faster paced), may prove beneficial for content retention and understanding.

Secondly, after small observations of freshman and sophomore high school students using social-networking websites, it is my belief, that incorporating tools and features of such websites into a school’s community may also prove beneficial: possibly integrating educational materials (teacher updates, school news [Facebook notifications]), providing easier, less challenging methods of peer communications, and incorporating peer accountability (using such things as “karma” points – monitored by faculty).


  • Understanding Parent Involvement

To begin, I will be analyzing the current level of parental involvement in a school: how many parents know what is going on around the school? How many parents are involved in the school? How many parents would like to be involved? And lastly, how many parents are unsure of where to start and/or feel as if there is a “barrier” of involvement. A higher parental involvement in a student’s education process may help improve a student’s success. Also, involving parents into a school’s community, not simply limited to volunteering, may develop a richer culture and spirit.


References:

  • Integrating Technology Into the Curriculum (Frei)
  • Future of the Internet (Zittrain)
  • Interpersonal Effects in Computer-Mediated Interaction (Communication Research, Walther)



Name: Traci E. Thomas

Pitch: Entreprenuers, Private Industries, and Corporations Are Attracted To Advertising Upon Online Radio Stations

Summary: Those wishing to market, sell, and introduce their goods or services deem successful advertising upon online radio stations opposed to traditional radio. Moreover, potential customers are less distracted by daily activities: driving, household chores, parenting children, or attending to personal hygiene while viewing and or listening to commercials. Therefore, advertising expenses are decreased dramactically with high returns. 

                                    PROPOSAL

Despite the media's "spin" of a global recession, I beg to differ. Our means of selling, distributing, and transporting goods and services has modified. Sustaining storefronts is obsolete and counterproductive, as holding a lease in commercial real estate is too costly. With the exceptions of restaurants, drug stores, fast food chains, hotels and motels, physician's offices, and airports successful businesses do better by coordinating transactions via the Internet. A simple and efficient website serves well to retain reoccurring sales. The objective is to eliminate overhead costs by advertising online to an infinite audience. Therefore, online radio stations are ideal for sellers desiring to connect with buyers.


Politics and Technology: Unlike traditional radio, online stations are not limited to content and subject matter. The topics are rarely monitored nor regulated by broadcasting standards. Conversations may be inappropriate and offensive depending upon one's morals, values, and beliefs; nonetheless, the options for advertising are unmeasurable. One must determine which dialoges, music, and interviews are acceptable as shows are rated. A seller may investigate the shows upon an online radio network and decipher which audience suits best for the company's product or service. Most online radio communities are owned collectively by the hosts; therefore, the protocol is limited. The airwaves are "free for expression;" therefore, numerous listeners tune in regularly.

New Economic Models: With a new mentality available to sellers, the Internet becomes a great ally. Consumers are spared additional costs on products and services as there`are no longer inventory, storage, and insurance fees added to thier purchases. Products may be shipped directly from a warehouse to thier location. Online banners upon radio station webpages are affordable and logical. Sellers pay only for clicks which lead to their website's homepage; therefore, the click-to-sale ratio is favorable. Savings are accrued by both buyers and sellers.

Peer Production and Collaboration: Online radio encourages all nationalities, genders, ages, and ethnicies to participate in common interests and concerns. All are invited to contribute their thoughts and ideas. This is the perfect "interaction intersection" for a company's display of productsor services.

"Citizen Media:" Advertisers are content with the open and candid platforms online stations offer. Information and commentaries are unbiased as individuals are many times anonymous. Citizens voice true feelings and emotions; therefore, true characters are heard throughout the stations. Democratic and liberal codes suggest that all are involved in the network's material.

Traditional and physical radio stations are becoming obsolete. Sadly, those holding degrees in Mass Communication, Marketing, Economics, and Public Relations are subject to reeducating themselves with technology and innovation. Many tradional Advertising Sales Representatives , Disk Jockeys, Event`Planners, and Celebrity Managqers are fastly becoming unemployed. Businesses and establishments are selecting online media as a generous means to reward their marketing efforts. 

                                    References:


Blog Talk Radio. www.blogtalkradio.com


Brown, Rita. WBLS FM New York, NY. Personal Interview. February 17, 2009.

Manu, Sam. Host. Live From L.A. Personal Interview. February 20, 2009.

Watts, Tim. WWIN FM Baltimore, MD. Personal Interview. February 11, 2009.


  • Name: Bhim P. Upadhyaya
  • Pitch:

--An Impact Assessment of Open Source Software Certification in Warranty Domain--


While researching during first assignment (Wiki editing) I noted that there is a huge interest in open source, also there are various big communities for this (e.g. http://www.opensource.org/). Further, I noted that some of the organizations like Red Hat have already introduced certification in their open source server technologies. Red Hat Linux grew up as an open source server technology till its 8th version, later they decided to release an enterprise version supported by a basic community version. Its desktop version is known as Fedora Core, currently in its tenth version. The certification information can be found in the Red Hat site (http://www.redhat.com/certification/).

Today, there are numerous open source technologies that a product company can choose from. There are both advantages and disadvantages of open source uses. So far as product companies are concerned, usually they have an architect-team that contains the core technical skills which are not only required to design and to development software systems but also to maintain and to extend such systems. This team spends enormous amount of time to make choices on technologies, it becomes even harder while carrying out this process for open source as there is not much support available in terms of services. It becomes largely a research activity if we discover a bug and wanted to fix that bug before we adapt a particular open source technology.

Current trend for open source certification is largely distributed i. e. each product releasing company (like Red Hat) have their own standards for certification. These standards vary widely across such companies. Moreover, it becomes a strategy to attract open source community to enterprise solution- streams. This research also aims to separate the standards between community versions (truly open source) and enterprise versions, as a result, open source technology does not have to rely on enterprise versions.

An ideal situation in open source would be to have a global standard, also a global standard in certification. As with everything else this industry is also influenced by market policies. Sometimes the influence is so high that we loose the feeling of openness. Openness entirely becomes a way to reach to a closeness. A direction toward the ideal global standard would be to do case studies for various product-companies that are using open source technologies in their specific products. Once this impact analysis is done for substantially large number of products around the world, we can find commonalities (a particularists approach of finding knowledge, Dr. Pritchard – What is this thing called knowledge) and then aggregate that to form a global standard for open source. This can be applied for open source certification as well.

An enforcement of such global standards is hard to achieve but since software technologies have a lot of flexibility, in my opinion, enforcement should be inherent in the product itself. There should be quality related assertions (CAR Hoare – Unifying Theories of Programming, Oxford University Computing Laboratory) that would fail if a product does not meet specified standards and hence denial of such products during composite product-composition. This would technically stop low quality open-source products from being in the service of community. Now the question is who enforces such assertions? Ultimately, it should be mandated by a governing body.

This research aims to contribute in the direction of ideal open source standards by carrying out an impact assessment of open source certification in a global warranty-product (software) development company (http://www.4cs.com, we have around 18 very large vehicle manufacturing companies including some of the world's largest, like John Deere headquartered in quad cities, IL/IA; DTNA/Freightliner headquartered in Portland, OR). The result of this research reveals a feasibility of such ideal open standards in practice. It will also suggest a constructive direction to take without adding significant cost on the part of such companies. The whole thing will allow open software tools being developed and distributed over Internet without a compromise in quality and service.

In third assignment, I plan to do a mind-map picture that will become a part of final paper. I will email outline of the paper for professors' review.

  • Name:Adriana T. Albuquerque
  • Pitch: Free Music Downloads over the Internet

The theme of my pitch will be related to free music downloads over the internet. Should people be allowed to download music from the internet for free? My answer is yes. Besides iTunes and some other music aggregation where we must pay to download a song, I believe that there should be another way where we could legally download any song from the internet without being fined by the authorities. Besides Napster and some other illegal download sources of free music, we don’t really have an option but pay for a song on Itunes or buy a cd from the store. Even though the song costs 0.99 cents on iTunes, if you decide to buy more than 15 songs from the same artist, it should cost you more than a cd would cost in the store. On-line music downloads are very popular and it is growing quickly. According to the music industry, music downloads tripled during 2005.

Hilary Rosen the chief executive of the Recording Industry Association of America stated that, "Analysts report that just one of the many free downloading systems in operation is responsible for over 1.8 billion unauthorized downloads per month". She also mentioned that “Music sales are already suffering from the impactin the United States, sales decreased by more than 10% in 2001." I believe, someday, not far from today, everybody will have access to the internet, and music stores will no longer exist. As Janis Ian a Grammy award-winning American songwriter stated on an interview that, "The internet and downloading, is here to stay... Anyone who thinks otherwise should prepare themselves to end up on the slagheap of history."

I believe that more and more people are refusing to pay to download a song, which is why illegal downloading of music is still popular. Internet music downloads also offer the advantage of accessing many songs that are only available online and not available in stores, such as live music or an acoustic version of the same song. While a small percentage of the artists make a living off of selling downloads of their music off the internet, I believe that my solution would benefit the artist and the consumers. Many artists already make a lot of money by playing live concerts, selling posters and merchandise such as T-shirts and etc. Free download providers are not only good for us, but for the Musicians who can also enjoy the advantages provided by the internet to promote their work.

In summary, I believe that everyone should be able to download free music off the internet. It benefits the consumer and the musician. The musician will become more popular, they will make more exciting live concerts and everybody will have easier access to their work, and certainly they will still be making the same or even more amount of money as they always have. We as a consumer will expend less money buying CD’s and songs and we will have easier and better access to our favorite bands anytime, anywhere and for free.


References: Janis Ian, during a live European radio interview. 9-1-98----http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4474143.stm----Hilary B. Rosen, A letter to the Honorable Rick Boucher, Congressman, February 28, 2002.

  • Name: Murkin Martinez Beltran
  • Pitch: Patents and Innovation

The general question to be explored will be, "How is the Public/Consumer Affected by Current Patent Law?"

In 1999, Amazon filed suit against BarnesandNoble.com for infringing on it's 1-Click purchasing patent. This patent allows a customer to purchase an item on Amazon's website by clicking on only one link/button (assuming a profile was previously created). Ten years later, the patent continues to be fought in the courts. There have been several reasons proposed for rejecting this patent. They range from court submissions of "prior art" to judges commenting that the idea of "1-Click" purchasing was "obvious to a person having ordinary skill".

In January of 2009, Palm announced their next generation smartphone, the Palm Pre. Not only was it full featured, it appeared to answer, point for point, many of the perceived short comings of Apple's iPhone. Additionally, it mimicked many of the iPhone's touch-based actions possible via its touch-screen interface. Patented innovations such as swiping down a screen to scroll through a list worked in nearly the exact same way as on the iPhone. Within days, Apple spoke publicly of "going after" any company that were to "rip off our intellectual property". Palm responded, "we have the tools necessary to defend ourselves." Soon after, it was discovered that Google had specifically removed certain touch capabilities from its Android OS phone, a Linux-based device, in order to stem any conflicts with or litigation by Apple.

In September of 2008, the Wall Street Journal published an article (and subsequent editorial/blog posts) discussing a company named Intellectual Ventures (IV). IV and other companies like it such as Acacia, do not develop any products, nor do they generate innovations themselves, instead they either buy or service pre-existing patents and monetize them through licensing, or profit through litigation or threat of litigation. They are businesses in an emerging market which sees patents as an asset class to be bought en masse.

These examples will serve as example cases upon which my research will be based. I also intend to use some of the themes covered in the assigned readings of Lessig's Code 2.0.

Outline:

I. Current Events: Patent Law and Intellectual Property
a. Amazon.com: 1-Click Patent
b. Approaches to Multi-touch Technology (Apple, Google, Palm)
c. Patent Licensing and Litigation (Acacia & Intellectual Ventures)

II. Governments as
a. Representatives of the public
b. Defenders of the public good.

III. Innovation
a. Societal change, progress, and improvement.
b. Linear vs. Generative innovation.
c. Technology as force for innovation.

IV. Ways to Promote Progress/Improvement/Innovation in Society
a. Patents (History, Pros & Cons)
b. The "Commons" (History, Pros & Cons)

Keywords:

Multi-touch, patent protection, cross-patent licensing, intellectual property, litigation play (aka patent troll), commons, innovation, generative

Sources:


  • Name: Claudette Goyanes
  • Pitch: Applying the psychology of Privacy Regulation mechanisms to the virtual world

I would like feedback on whether this topic seems related enough to what he have discussed; I believe it extends the discussions of the class on Peer Collaboration and the one on Privacy. As a psychology major, I can't help but observe most of our discussions from that point of view.

Environmental psychology considers the effects of environmental factors on human behavior and stress levels, and how humans adapt their behavior to reduce anxiety or stress in an environment by regulating their psychological privacy. For example it considers the effect of having someone sit at the same table as you in the library when there are other tables open and how long on average it will take you to leave the table due to the low-level stress caused by their improper seat choice; it considers the effects of crowds and crowded spaces such as a subway car, and how humans might counter the imposition on our personal space by regulating our psychological space by not making eye contact with anyone; it considers at what distance and from what direction someone approaching us causes the most stress, and how we counter those stressors by reorienting ourselves; it considers how there is a universal understanding of personal space and how the average distance between two people in conversation under normal circumstances is understood by almost all members of a culture without ever being verbalized.

Within the virtual world, studies have shown that very soon after a new technology is developed, individuals develop distinct social expectations for behavior, and soon find ways to regulate their psychological privacy by using features of the technology to keep people at a certain psychological distance. For example, studies have shown that there are behavioral expectations for cell phone use: If you have a cell phone, there is often an expectation that you will generally be available for calls and if you are unreachable for even a couple of hours, there can be social consequences from a friend, parent or partner. And when a person thinks you purposely hit Ignore when you saw their incoming call (who hasn't gotten the dreaded one ring and suddenly you're sent to voicemail and thought "Hey! That jerk ignored my call!) they may be offended, even though everyone has a right to determine when they can or can't talk. So how do humans counter the virtual privacy intrusion they experience as a result of having a cell phone? Are the mechanisms similar to those we use for privacy regulation in our physical space? One answer can be found in the growing popularity of text messaging. It's a way of being instantly available to interact with someone while holding back information (as unimportant as it may be) as a way of balancing the feeling of intrusion. They may need an answer to their question right now and you may feel pressure to respond, but in responding they will not hear that your voice is scratchy from just waking up or hear the background noise that gives away your location and current activity.

For my project, I would like to compare privacy regulation mechanisms utilized in personal space and find corresponding mechanisms developed in a virtual environment that almost everyone is familiar with: the instant message. Widespread instant messaging programs started as very simple programs and as a result of their growth in popularity, over time have developed many features and styles of usage which serve to regulate privacy and can be correlated to similar mechanisms used in real space. In my paper, I would discuss elements of instant messaging ettiquette, instant message program features, and common behaviors, and relate them to theories of environmental psychology. Some examples include use of the Away message, font color and size options, alert sounds, availability expectation, appropriate methods of approach, the use of the invisible sign on, etc.

Does this sound like an acceptable topic? Thanks, Claudette


  • Name: Arthur Kasdan
  • Pitch: Software companies like CISCO, Microsoft, Adobe, and others who produce expensive software (or any commercial software for that matter) stand to lose (and have lost) large amounts of money to piracy.

Hotline Connect, released in 1997 (I was 8), was the first software in my experience that was often used to pirate software. An underground community developed in which certain people would download the Server edition and host chat rooms which could easily share files they chose on their computer. Many of these turned into black markets of a sort for software and pornography; one would often be required to upload one valuable program before being given an account on one of these servers. Many of these servers contained thousands of dollars of software easily obtainable by being nice to the administrator, at best, and uploading something of your own at worst. And things have gotten much easier from there.

P2P programs that many are familiar with now are widely used, from Limewire to BitTorrent applications. Software, licensed multimedia of all kinds and any other copyrighted digital material is available to anyone who takes the time to look it up on Google.

How can this be prevented- or at least discouraged- while respecting the rights and privacy of users? 

       What effective approaches have been taken or proposed here or in other countries?

Does the ability to legally download software decrease the amount of illegal downloading of that software?

  • Name: Meredith Whittaker
  • Pitch: RIAA stops suing individuals, partners with ISPs to punish pirates (and why this is fascinating!)

Synopsis

In mid-December, the Wall Street Journal reported that the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) was set to switch from suing those suspected of illegal file sharing, to partnering with an undisclosed list of Internet service providers (ISPs) to target suspected music pirates with warning letters and, potentially, suspension of Internet service.

The RIAA sees this new strategy as a better and more friendly deterrent to music pirating: a lighter punishment more frequently, and more publicly administered.

While this move doesn't preclude additional lawsuits, it marks a sea change from the RIAA's litany of suits, which has done little to stem the tide of file sharing while painting the RIAA to many as a litigious, mean-spirited dinosaur.

As part of the agreement, ISPs would be asked to send warning emails to users whom the RIAA identifies as making music available for illegal download. An undisclosed number of warnings, possibly accompanied by slowed Internet speeds, would be sent before punishment, identified vaguely as a reduction in service, and not precluding the possibility of service suspension, took effect.

The ISPs would not be asked to divulge details about the users to the RIAA or others.

Due process for those wrongly accused is still being worked out.

All this makes us ask... (Or, what I'll research)

  • What are the effects when "intermediaries", in this case ISPs, are asked to police content?
  • What are the effects of taking the punishment for alleged infringement out of the public, judicial realm, and making it a private matter decided by means of a private enforcement regime?
  • What are the general implications of a cozy relationship between content distributors and (some, but not other) content creators and providers?
  • With the precedent of this kind of enforcement, will some il/legal activity be monitored, and punished, more severely than other il/legal activity due to deals between ISPs and the activities' purported victims?
  • Protracting out from this specific case, if ISPs are asked (as they have been in the past, notably by the Motion Picture Association of America) to actively police content via filtering technologies, what becomes of fair use? What rights to privacy should those accessing content via an ISPs "tubes" retain? Is impartiality a quality that should be preserved in intermediaries (ISPs)?
  • Is Internet access a right that should be protected? Or, what other rights are infringed upon when Internet access is revoked?
  • And others suggested by you! (Please, feel free to add your questions here.)

Sources so far

--Meredith 21:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Name: William Alexander Duke

Pitch: Privacy you must fight for it

Privacy on the web and in the physical world is receding. We see more and more of where people have windows in their lives through information. Because information can be knowledge and knowledge can be power we have an imminent need to protect privacy of our information. An assault on our privacy can come from private, commercial, or governmental avenues. As an adult does anyone have the right to know what you do, say and where you go at any moment and otherwise have your life dissected? I don't think so, but yet we see technology creeping up and stripping away privacy.

The main items that need to be addressed is that all information is property with respect to ownership. Meaning a data owner or creator by action has the right to all data they create and it is considered their property. In addition to that anonymity and privacy should be inviolate with respect to voluntary identification. Meaning that a person can choose to identify themselves online, but is never forced.

In a case in New York an Event Data Recorder (EDR) showed that a man was speeding at the time of an accident; however the data was obtained without the driver's permission or a warrant. I find that to be unreasonable, as the data of the EDR is a part of the vehicle and is created by the actions of the driver and could be construed as property of the owner. The data was seized without regard to it being private property that was not in "plain view" and nor was data contraband. This violates the exclusionary rule in my opinion, as data is property. A New York court did not see it that way and ruled that data was not property.

On the reverse we see cases involving Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) bringing to bear lawsuits for copyright infringement for downloading or distributing music through peer-to-peer sharing software, it is considered a felony. How in one context can data be a protected and considered property and in another that classification is irrelevant? Where is equal protection under the law? Data is property.

Everything you do on the internet leaves a trail, one that could be traced back to you and gives whomever a window into your life. Does someone have a right to know that you have three kids? Where they go to school? What credit cards you have? What groceries are in your home? Your sexual preferences? No, they do not.

I propose that there never be any restrictions on anonymizing software, proxy and anonymous remailer services or other means of keeping your identity or information of your choosing private.

Mail has nothing but a lock made of paper, Attorney-client privilege is a lock made of vibrated air and belief. A lock made of ones and zeros should be respected as well.

References Abelson, Ledeen, Lewis, Blown to Bits, Chapter 2: Naked in the Sunlight: Privacy Lost, Privacy Abandoned

Name: Paul Lester

Pitch: The changing face of journalism


The theme for my final project is how the Internet is changing the face of journalism. The rise of the Internet has dramatically altered how we define journalists, our consumption of media and how news organizations generate revenue streams.

In Merriam-Webster’s dictionary, the first definition of news is “a report of recent events.” As technology becomes more accessible, the line between those who report recent events and the audience has blurred.

In the mid-1990s, blogging became a popular method for people to publish their ideas and observations. Far from being online diaries, bloggers actually broke or enhanced the news. For instance, shortly after CBS aired Dan Rather’s "60 Minutes" segment alleging George Bush received special treatment during his service in the Texas National Guard, bloggers quickly debunked the report by pointing out key documents used in the story were forgeries.

The Internet has spawned an entirely new genre of story telling known as citizen journalism. In 1999, activists who were protesting the World Trade Organization meetings in Seattle wanted their experiences documented. Frustrated by the scant exposure from traditional media outlets, the activists started Indymedia, where they posted stories, video and photos of their demonstrations. Wikinews allows everyday people to write news articles on any topic for a large audience. On a smaller scale, iBrattleboro.com, a community news site in Brattleboro, Vermont, contains news articles posted only by residents of the town.

Even large media companies are engaging in participatory journalism. CNN’s iReport and BBC’s Have Your Say are just two examples of news organizations asking for users to contribute stories, video, photos and other content.

Technological advances in social networking sites such as Quik, Flickr and Twitter are making it easier for users to break news faster than any television channel can. Janis Krums was one of the first people to post an online photo of the US Airways plane that landed in the Hudson River. While television helicopters and print photographers were scrambling to determine a game plan for covering the story, Krums, who was standing on a ferry that was en route to rescue passengers and crew of the ditched plane, snapped a photo of the scene with his iPhone. He then sent the picture to Twitter via Twitpic along with a status update reading “There's a plane in the Hudson. I'm on the ferry going to pick up the people. Crazy.”

The consumption of news has changed as a result of Really Simple Syndication (RSS). Instead of waiting for our morning paper for the day’s headlines, we now use RSS readers to aggregate news from multiple sources from around the world and have it delivered to us as soon stories are posted.

Newspapers across the country are suffering a slow death as a result of the Internet. Revenue has declined as newsstand sales, advertising and print subscriptions dry up. Papers are being forced to find new business models in order to survive.

Some newspapers, like the Detroit Free Press and Christian Science Monitor, are either making large cuts to their print product or scrapping them altogether. One experimental method to help generate money for newspaper websites is called micropatronage, which is how open source projects like spot.us fund their journalistic endeavors. The idea is that the public will donate cash to fund stories they are interested in. Newspapers are also considering using some sort of micropayment system to charge readers for content. However, no news organization has figured out a way to make this system work.

Although there are many more ways the Internet is changing journalism, I hope to concentrate my efforts on the topics listed above. However, after conducting more research, I may find that just one of the issues (such as social networking and journalism) warrants my entire focus of the project. --Paulglester 22:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


  • Name: Zeeshan ALi
  • Pitch: Internet: a Foe!!

I would like to discuss matters over the increasing use of internet that can affect the human life in various ways. Our dependency for day-to-day work on the internet is certainly on the rise. I would like to spread my topic in three main points: 1). CYBERCRIME: in today’s world, internet banking is preferred to most people where they can easily access to their bank accounts, transfer money and purchase goods etc etc. But with increasing hacktivism, there is more probability of theft of intellectual property & money. Money alone is not the issue; personal stuff from the internet can be stolen not knowing whether it ever existed. 2). Copyright: Another major issue with the internet is that there is illegal downloading of music, movies and software. Though the internet filtering police has done much to stop illegal downloading but the use of torrents is still very common in the UK and America. One cannot say that innovation in internet filtering is stopping illegal access to websites because juxtapose the technology innovation, there is improvement in hacking methods and it will continue to pursue. Also, illegal music downloading is very common but it is wrong for the musicians as they work hard on their albums and they should earn every penny of royalty by legal purchase of music. 3). General harms of internet on human beings.

I have based my topic only on the harmful effects of internet and i will make a mind-map on these points with references for assignment 3. (note: I am not totally against the INTERNET but i would like to enlighten people about the Augmenting harms of the internet)

  • Name: Jay Eberhard
  • Pitch: Information in the public record: Who really owns the data that forms your identity?

Information in the public record has always been freely accessible to all; however, the access of such information was restricted by physical barriers. The internet has removed those barriers. Interested individuals now have tremendous power in the collection and aggregation of sources on the internet which act as a vendor for this information. Personal information that resides in the public record is certainly an asset, but who really owns it? I will look at the issue of ownership of public information, from both a traditional economic standpoint and from a technological standpoint, since both are of equal importance.

Economically, information is an intangible good, meaning that if someone purchases information it does not cease to exist. Information is a public or non-rival economic good. Yet even information in the public domain is valuable and vulnerable, and currently almost entirely without protection. Beyond Google, there are vast amounts of public information available, either for sale or for the taking, which individuals retain little if any control over and are easily exploited. A new section of economic activity is thus opened by the sale of public information, a good that was once free. To what extent should public information be protected from such activity? What ethics should such vendors follow when conducting their business?

From a technological standpoint, the information systems that house public record information are an additional asset aside from the information itself. Within each system are separate policies, different responsibilities and roles and security measures for the same information. Should a common framework for access of public record information be established to ensure that policies and procedures in place at the original organization have their enforcement maintained, even as the data migrates to the systems of other organizations? What might such a framework mandate in the rights of the information while allowing the owners of the technological assets to retain ownership of their information systems?

The question which I seek to answer essentially is "Who owns public information?" which is essentially the question asked by Anne Branscomb asked, but her analysis is quite dated, as her book on the broader subject was published 15 years ago, and much has changed since then. I would like to provide a contemporary update to this question for the area of public record information.

--Jeberhard 20:37, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Name: Hilary

Pitch:

The open and free availability of data in science is seen by many as necessary for ensuring reproducibility of results, diversity of analysis, and promoting open inquiry. The Internet provides a low-cost way for scientists to distribute and share data and several major funding organizations such as the NIH have issued statements designed to promote sharing [1] However, many researchers in the biomedical sciences are hesitant to share data online. .[2]

In a previous study, I examined whether genetics and bioinformatics researchers are using intellectual property controls to assert rights in online databases in order to control the use or redistribution of their data. I looked at databases mentioned in the Nucleic Acids Research database issue [3] to see if they included copyright notices or licenses governing use of the data. I found that almost half of online scientific databases surveyed contain notices claiming copyright (the majority of those claiming copyright claim copyright by the institution) and a significant minority use custom licenses intended to restrict use of online scientific databases. 33% of the 40 databases randomly selected from the 2009 NAR Database issue contain notices attributing copyright to the institution. 35% of the databases randomly selected from the 2009 NAR Database issue also used licenses, with 26% using custom "browse-wrap" or terms of service licenses. Of these custom licenses, more than half included "non-commercial" terms.

For example, the Deja Vu project contains the following notice: "This software and data are provided to enhance knowledge and encourage progress in the scientific community and are to be used only for research and educational purposes. Any reproduction or use for commercial purpose is prohibited without the prior express written permission of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. Please be aware that you are transmitting your data on an unsecured link and UTSW is not responsible for the security of that data. Copyright 1999-2007 by University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center All Rights Reserved" [4]

There are three issues I am interested in. First, it is not clear that one can assert copyright in databases [5] and I wonder if the use of copyright notices on databases creates a "chilling effect" thereby discouraging other researchers from using the work. Second, it is generally assumed by academics that their works are exempt from the "work-for-hire" clause in the Copyright Act. [6] However, several recent cases have challenged this exemption. [7] Any formal challenges to this would have significant implications for licensing agreements signed by the researchers. I am curious to find out whether the use of copyright notices attributing copyright to the institution are indicative of a shift in attitudes by researchers. Third, since the majority of databases with licenses have non-commercial terms, I would like to investigate researchers' attitudes towards commercial use. 21% of geneticists surveyed by Campbell et al. [8] stated concerns about protecting the commercial value of results as a reason for withholding results.I would like to understand what applications researchers see as "commercial" uses of their work and what their concerns are regarding commercial re-use.

-- Hilary 06:27, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

  • Name: Devon K. Lind
  • Pitch: Creative iTransparency

  • Creative property released through the vehicle of transparency will reclaim the inherent right of the creator and supersede government confiscation because: an idea, once released is incapable of confinement.

Creative iTransparency will:

  • Redefine creative property rights.

  • Provide an open and accountable environment for authors and artists to cultivate the creative culture of literary and artistic works.
    [In the same counterintuitive way that the unlocked generativity of open source and wikis has succeeded.]

    • Project in two parts:
    I. Map online creative commons ecosystem, based primarily around the case studies of the Creative Commons.

    II. Evaluate Creative iTransparency through online creative commons ecosystem to investigate if "open and accountable" systems exist and are potentially demonstrating transparency and visibility. I plan on taking the best of the collected specimens to assess each system as a model of Creative iTransparency. If these systems turn out to provide enough transparency they would thereby be capable of providing visibility through being an "open" platform available and accessible to all. Accountability would then fall on the visibility and equal "citizenship" of the environment and ideally would extend to the observers/outsiders to the environment. My hypothesis is that if all of the above line up accordingly protection of the work will rely less on the legality of copyright as we now know it and will be provided through iTransparency. In the absence of a working model I will lay out the research as to why a model is not [yet] possible or not [yet] present and will then build a hypothetical model to present what I think would work according to the downfalls of the observed non-working models.

    • The Shortcomings of Copyright:

      “No good case exists for the inequality of real and intellectual property, because no good case can exist for treating with special disfavor the work of the spirit and the mind.” (Helprin, 2007)[1]

    Duration: Once the limited duration of copyright runs out (50 years after death in most countries, 70 years in the U.S.) the creative property enters a sort of economic exploitive limbo passing over the descendants of the creator to remain under the “protection” of the publishers, executives and businesses connected to the work.

    Invisability & Convolution: The legal protection of literary and artistic works under copyright prevents only unauthorized use of the expressions of ideas, not the ideas themselves. The law can be – and in most countries is – simply declaratory. So a created work is considered protected as soon as it exists without any public register of copyright (as in the instance of industrial property).[2] Economic and moral infringement of copyright is therefore easy, and if without means of visibility, difficult to prove.

    Intellectual property defined:

    Intellectual property is divided into two categories: Industrial property, which includes inventions (patents), trademarks, industrial designs, and geographic indications of source; and Copyright, which includes literary and artistic works such as novels, poems and plays, films, musical works, artistic works such as drawings, paintings, photographs and sculptures, and architectural designs. Rights related to copyright include those of performing artists in their performances, producers of phonograms in their recordings, and those of broadcasters in their radio and television programs. (World Intellectual Property Organization)[2]

    --Devonklind 16:40, 25 February 2009 (UTC+8) --Revised Devonklind 19:40, 7 March 2009 (UTC+8)

    • References:
    1. ↑ Helprin, Mark A Great Idea Lives Forever. Shouldn’t Its Copyright?, NYTimes.com May 2007
    2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 What is Intellectual Property?, WIPO
    • Name:Jan-Carlo De Hoyos
    • Pitch: Legal and Free Music sharing

    A great network has transpired in which massive amounts of media are vastly transferred and exchanged between many people. Through Peer-to-Peer networks, and even simpler methods, such as file hosting, or even a simple e-mail attachment, "copyrighted" and "protected" media is shared between one or more parties, alleviating each recipient of any and all financial input.

    It is not at all uncommon to find a person who has a great media library, filled with lots of albums from almost every artist they have ever listened to, and their favorite movies and films, almost none of which were paid for. To some, this is considered immoral, wrong, and possibly even tragic. But can you really blame these people? This material is all readily available through the P2P softwares and BitTorrents, and when it comes down to it, everybody is looking for the cheapest price. What price could be cheaper than free?

    There are benefits for the those who are involved in marketing the music. By providing the media online and free, physical production costs for the media would be greatly reduced. Reduced amounts of CD cases, CDs, cover printing, and the lack of mass production would lead to less shipping to each and every store that will carry the product. In the long run, they could take a look at where they are spending those finances, and use it for something else, like developing new clothing and shoe lines, jewelry, stickers, patches, or any other form of product placement representing the artist. This way, fans can purchase something unique and personalized while still advertising for the artist. In addition, curious observers of these products can simply look up the artist, obtain and listen to their songs for free, and possibly become fans themselves.

    With the general prices of CDs currently ranging from 10 to 20 dollars, it can get expensive to purchase more than one cd. and with the general price of an online song at 99 cents, buying individual songs can eventually, at times, cost more than the CD itself. For the consumer, the benefits of free music sharing are quite obvious. The music that they all know and love is readily available, alleviating the costs of purchasing CDs or even paying iTunes downloads as well as other services. The costly expenses of CDs can be redirected towards buying the various clothes and other products provided by their favorite artists.

    There are also benefits beyond the simple ones that I have already stated. For example, copyrights on music would be much more lenient. Lawsuits over sampled material would be scarce, and thus, artists such as Kanye West and Daft Punk would not have to deal with the legal aspect of making their music. They would simply make it. There would be no limitation due to artists refusing their request to allow the samples to be used in their tracks. this would allow artists such as these to put out everything that they make, without hassle.

    • Name: Jennifer C. Olds
    • Pitch: New Opportunities for Education

    Without thought, we turn on our computers and connect to the internet, we then decide where we want to go on the internet; do we finish writing assignment 2 for our class on Tuesday, should we quickly get on facebook and say hi to our eight hundred or so friends, or should we get on webMD and ask about that strange lump in our leg? I know this sounds so simple; but, we are given a choice. For many people within the United States, even across the world there is nothing to turn on (PC), nothing to connect to (internet), and most of all no assignment to turn in (education) no choice.

    You know the human mind constantly seeks answers, we ask “Why?” And who is it that we are asking? We are asking each other, communicating. We are looking for the best advice and not a one-sided bias opinion. So, my question is this; what happens when someone asks a question and they’re cut off from the world? Whose advice or opinion are they receiving, and is it correct?

    Several new opportunities for education have blossomed in some very unlikely areas and are now available to students all across the world. Apples iTunes U has opened a gateway for students to learn “anytime and anywhere”. “Apple hosts ITunes U as a free service” that allows professors, teachers, and “affiliates” to distribute educational media to students and with a simple push of the button, students can download lectures, send and receive homework, get their email, and browse the web. In Alaska’s Yukon the geographical barrier to a better education was torn down by a high speed network called DeltaNet. DeltaNet has boosted academic scores for three years running. Australia “The Outback” The school of the Air and remote learning has created a classroom for children hundreds of kilometers apart using a satellite link and a transreceiver. No excuses for missing class now. Here in the United States cutting edge Universities are already utilizing distant education in order to reach untapped potential across the world. Adult education is on the rise, now that a forum for the 30’s, 40’s, 50’s, even 90 somethings has been created. These dedicated individuals can take classes in the comfort of their own home while cooking dinner. Let’s not forget the disabled, all the new opportunities in education have granted them a new life as well. The bedbound can earn a degree via distant education; the blind can have the text read to them with the aid of software. In my opinion the possibilities are endless; so, who is affected by these innovations in emerging /technology everyone.

    Finding new opportunities for education is an ongoing worldwide effort, with broadband speed being a major player in the game. The downfall, economically challenged countries simply do not have the technology or the capability of gaining access to the information.

    Thanks to the efforts of private funds, organization and government grants, and volunteers; new educational opportunities are emerging very rapidly helping not only our children, but adults looking to attain a degree, the disabled, and the geographically challenged. Without this effort society, culture, and the world as we know it could succumb to someone’s, very dangerous bias opinion.

    References :



    ______________________________________________________________________________

    • Name: Tessa L. McCue.
    • Pitch: Finding the balance between E-learning and Traditional Learning

    '

    Education in today’s society has surpassed the classroom. While there is still the traditional classroom setting for learning, E- learning as emerged, creating new venues. E-learning is defined as, “the use of digital technologies and media to deliver, support and enhance teaching, learning, assessment and evaluation” (A Guide for Learning Technologies 2003). The ever growing benefits with E-learning are evident, yet we still need to acknowledge the values of traditional education. Challenges are abundant though. For example, there are credibility issues and limited understanding of the digital world on behalf of some populations, and more. Our society has much embrace in its journey to blend E-learning and traditional education. Defining E-learning can be daunting and overwhelming as technology alone as opened doors to many opinions and theories. The numerous web sites visited thus far are a link to fairy tale-land of sorts with numerous definitions. Ironically, E-learning is being practiced with this assignment. It is learning done through the computer with the delivery of content given through the internet, or by digital or electronic tools. This technology can be viewed as more efficient and more accommodating to one’s life style, work schedule or comfort zone. It’s an exciting time working and learning with today’s technology, guiding and directing society. Benefits of E-learning are many, such as tapping into all your senses, which enhances memory (The Psychology of Learning). Benefits can also include reduced spending, more efficient learning time, and consistent delivery, to name a few. (The Benefits and Drawbacks of e-Learning). Benefits with traditional classroom settings cannot be ignored though. One-on-one interaction allows development and growth of interpersonal communication skills while providing mentoring and directed guidance. Trying to summarize the benefits of each learning environment create challenges just as there are many challenges to having a successful E-learning experience. Exposing people to new technology is challenging as they typically latch on to what is familiar, displaying a natural resistance to change. I personally have witnessed technology and its ever changing options and opportunities. With E-learning, there is no teacher at the head of the class to talk the student through each step. More so, these teachers need to be ahead of their game. The responsibility lies with the educators; teachers need to be students themselves to keep up with technology. Whereas, the challenges in a traditional classroom are the lack of an engaging teacher, the inability to tap into one’s senses enough, and the risk of outdated material being presented. What’s important in any educational setting is that the journey is not a path of isolation. No student should be left alone. An inherent connection is critical for a sense of belonging to a community. The evidence of the benefits of E-learning is undeniable; however, without the responsible use of the tools and exposure and proper training, there can be catastrophic results. I believe it is imperative there be a blending of E-learning and the traditional learning environment. This is essential for a quality of life and a successful education.

    --TLeeMQ 17:51, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

    • Name: Steve Kurlowecz
    • Pitch: Microlicensing of Internet content

    One thing I find problematic with the Internet is the difficulty in identifying ownership/licensing information for very small pieces of content (e.g, Web pages, parts of Web pages, graphics, icons, small pieces of code) published on the Web. I propose to explore the concept of microlicensing - simplified and automated licensing of very small Internet content/works via tagging (by the owner/copyright holder) of the Internet content with owner and licensing/usage rights information. As with the analogous microloaning concept, where lending such small amounts of money was seen as impractical from an accounting point of view and ineffective from an entrepreneurial point of view, but been shown to be both practical and effective, I propose to study the practicality and effectiveness of microlicensing of Internet content.

    Some commercial entities are pursuing patents on aspects of microlicensing, but they are often focused on charging royalty payments for small calculated usages. See Microsoft's published US Patent Application, US20090006225A1, for “DISTRIBUTION CHANNELS AND MONETIZING” (Published 1/1/09, Filed 6/29/07) and Aries Systems' US Patent, US 6,119,108, for a “Secure electronic publishing system” (Issued 9/12/2000). Additionally, iCents.net is touting a scheme to pay for premium content on websites using microsubscriptions and micropayments in a way that does not disrupt the user experience on those websites. ACAP (Automated Content Access Protocol) is a non-proprietary, global permissions tool that purports to address some of these issues as well (http://www.the-acap.org/Home.aspx. There exist some Internet content/software certification/signing schemes, but these tend to be fairly heavyweight and not appropriate for very small, especially non-commercial, Internet content. There are also analogies in the analog world of music royalty payments that appear to work and that might influence an Internet content microlicensing scheme (see http://www.bmi.com).

    What I have not found is any focus on the use of open standards to enable content (Rich Internet Application or otherwise) generation tools (e.g., Adobe Dreamweaver, Wordpress) to easily, efficiently and automatically tag created content with owner/licensing information. The owner/licensing information might take the form of Web cookie-like data embedded into the Internet content – retrievable by content display tools (e.g., Web browsers). I also found no open source projects that appear to have development underway of such a tool. I would like to explore the feasibility of initiating such an effort. --skurlowecz 18:02, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

    • Name: Wade R.
    • Pitch: Social, Cultural and Psychological Effects of The Internet

    The internet continues to grow at an alarming rate which astounds me. Every day, new articles are published, new blogs are created, torrents are uploaded, websites are developed – the list goes on. Being an information junkie, I strive and struggle to keep up with what is happening and what is new. This never ending online quest for knowledge has left me with a myriad of questions (socially, culturally and psychologically) that I am in a quest to find answers for. By the end of my project, there most likely (almost definitely) will still not be a perfect answer but there will hopefully be progress towards one. With so much information being generated every day and made available to anyone with a computer and an internet connection, does all this access to infinite information lead to us being empowered or overloaded? Social networking websites such as Facebook, Myspace and Twitter are increasing their member bases every day. A big question is do these online communities increase social participation or social isolation? At what point does web browsing or 'online researching' turn into mindless procrastination? Blogs such as zenhabits.net and lifehacker.com encourage productivity and promote different productivity techniques as well as a variety of productivity softwares. With all this information and software available are we really more productive? Technology is intended to make our lives easier so how does our generations stress and life satisfaction compare to previous generations? The iPhone and Blackberry (amongst other PDA's) make instant email, 24/7 internet access and always being available a reality – the blackberry has even been dubbed the 'crackberry' by many of its devotees. I sleep with my iPhone on my pillow! Newspaper reports have even suggested that Barack Obama is addicted to his 'crackberry'. But what are the implications socially and personally behind being 'available' at all hours of the day? What is the correct etiquette to replying to messages when the sender KNOWS that you have a sleek PDA that pings every time they want to tell you something or send you a funny youtube link? Does web time make up for face time socially?

    I rely on the internet for more things than I can possibly list and I am a huge advocate for it. However, like any invention, the internet has its advantages and disadvantages. Some examples from my ever growing list of what I use the internet for include keeping in touch with friends, watching my favorite shows, being a distance education student all the way from London and checking my RSS feeds WAY too often. For my topic, I wish to explore both the positive and negative aspects of internet usage on us as a society and global community. How much is it helping us and how much is it hurting us? I wish to explore this broad topic by looking closer at the six following topics/subject of conversation:

    -The Paradox of Productivity.

    -Social 'Networking' – is it net-working or not-working?

    -How much of Facebook is Fakebook? The creation of online personas on social networking websites.

    -Should we be as available as the information on the internet? Scarcity vs Availability in online communications.

    -'Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V,' the complexities of privacy on the internet.

    -'Just google it.' Information overload and internet ADD.

    The conclusion of my project will explore the issue of balancing an online life with real life including my own personal steps together with suggestions made by professionals (online of course!)

    Please, if you are so inclined, leave me any feedback and suggestions that I can take on board. Also if you would be so kind as to complete my self-created, very short online survey for this project, it would really help me narrow the focus and weighting of my project. Thank you:

    http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=6sBWo03lc2N0w1oRUI7yCQ_3d_3d

    Articles of interest:


    --Wade 19:49, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

    • Name: Samuel Saidel Goley
    • Pitch: How social networks are changing the face of business

    The internet has changed how we conduct business. It has spurred the growth of new markets and expansion of existing ones but, even more importantly, it has provided corporations and individuals with the ability to communicate in ways never before possible. This increased level of interaction has led directly to economic growth. The ability of suppliers, manufacturers, distributors, and consumers to remain in constant contact has improved companies production models and has cut down on the time and effort required to produce goods.

    The internet's ability to connect people has changed the dynamics of business in other ways as well. Social networking sites such as Facebook are dramatically changing the way in which professionals are interacting with clients and colleagues. These networking programs, originally designed as social applications which allows you to stay in contacts with friends and family, have taken on a new role as a corporate tool useful in promotional advertising, public relations, event planning, and many others. In addition, an industry of “Facebook experts” and similar advisors have grown around the increased demand of businesses for knowledge and advice in the use of social networks as corporate tools.

    My project will analyze the effects of social networks, particularly Facebook, on business. I will examine how such networks are being used in the corporate world by both non-profit and for-profit corporations. My research will evaluate the following:

    • How the gap between the company and the customer is growing smaller due to online social networks, and who is benefiting from this.
    • If brand loyalty has increased do to such things as Facebook’s “fan” pages.
    • Types of strategies implemented by companies and professionals when using networks like Facebook.
    • How business etiquette is being reformed to deal with these changes.
    • Subsequent questions arising from these issues.

    This area of investigation is relatively unexplored and very pertinent as the use of social networks by corporations and professionals is on the rise.

    • Name: Joshua Kapelman
    • Pitch: Internet Censorship and Governance
    I. Premise

    The internet is an amorphous ever-changing creature that has changed the world, as we have known it. It has connected previously unconnected peoples, spawned new debates, and allowed people to collaborate in a way that the crafters of the internet never dreamed. The question then becomes, in this new and wonderful age known as globalization, is how do we try to control something, which seems to be purely chaotic? The issues that arise are that the openness and freedom of information creates an environment for illegal activities such as child pornography, terrorist activities, and online gambling. Thus, many throughout the world support internet governance or blocking of these websites, which give rise to an age-old argument about censorship. By allowing governments to control who can access what site, we are surrendering rights of free speech. Medical sites, anti-government political sites, discussions on euthanasia, or even abortions could all suddenly become unreachable. Instead of the internet becoming a tool for communication and cooperation, it becomes inaccessible. Furthermore, many countries have already begun censoring what their citizens can and cannot view on the internet. OpenNet Initiative, a group dedicated to investigating filtering practices, has recently come out with a list of countries that are the most pervasive in filtering the internet. It is no surprise that they are in fact not merely filtering for inappropriate content, but filtering to maintain power and control over their citizens. For example, Iran, Syria and China are just three examples of countries that pervasively attempt to filter the internet to prevent political discussion. There is however, a substantial case for filtering. With access to the internet spreading, parents are having significantly harder times controlling what their children see and to whom they talk. In a recent article ChildWise CEO Bernadette McMenamin, stated, “In late 2006 Child Wise commissioned AC Neilson to conduct a survey of 1497 Australian internet users over the age of 18. The key outcomes of the survey were that 83 per cent believe that ISP’s should block all child pornography, 76 per cent would change to an ISP that blocked child pornography and 64 per cent are not confident that home based internet filters are effective.” If the majority of the country wants filtering, maybe it is needed.

    II. Case Study

    Australia, has become a pivotal case that deserves significant study, surrounding this very issue. In late 2008, Australia mandated internet filtering. They have also denied requests to make their internet blacklist public, thus furthering the censorship argument. Thus, the sites that are blocked by them are completely unknown. Furthermore, when Australia enacts these filters, the quality of service will decrease dramatically. Therefore, Australia will provide a terrific case in which further study will be warranted.

    III. Internet Governance

    Going forward, the question that needs to be answered is what if any role governments should have in controlling (or attempting to control) the internet, a land where no one state holds sovereignty. Thus, this will be the question I seek to investigate and analyze. For assignment 3, I plan on creating a global map based on current method of internet regulation per country.

    Sources Quoted

    Articles of Interest


    --JoshK 21:04, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


    • Name: Jason Parsons
    • Pitch: The right to mash-up

    Lawrence Lessig argues in Free Culture that “[u]sing the Internet and its archives, musicians are able to string together mixes of sound never before imagined; filmmakers are able to build moves out of clips on computers around the world All of these creations are technically illegal.”

    Lessig and others argue that the current state of the law makes it nearly impossible for ordinary people to secure rights to legally use copyrighted clips in their creations. Even exercising fair use rights guaranteed under the law is tricky business – as Lessig notes, fair use is “nothing more than the right to hire a lawyer.”

    I propose to document the process of making a “legal” remix of the type Mr. Lessig describes. I will approach several media owners and ask for licensing to use their media in a YouTube “mashup”. I will attempt to track down owners of copyrighted materials, get in touch with the appropriate staff, and secure rights to use their media. I will further enquire as to my rights of fair use, documenting the process along the way.

    For my final project, I expect to carry forward the lessons learned in this endeavor. I will make recommendations on potential policy changes that may allow for more creativity without compromising the rights of artists. I will reference the proposals of Mr. Lessig and others as applied to my attempt to create a “mashup”.

    The biggest challenge in this project will be getting in touch with the right folks in a timely manner. The results might well be that I’m unable to even get the right person on the phone – which would be telling in itself.

    Edit - I give up on making citations work in mediawiki. Some of the template:citation core is missing; I tried to add it with poor results. Citations are as follows:

    1. Lessig, L. (2004). Free Culture (p. 106). New York: The Penguin Press.

    2. Lessig: "Fair Use is The Right to Hire a Lawyer", from "Andy Carvin's Waste of Bandwidth": http://www.andycarvin.com/archives/2007/05/lessig_fair_use_is_the_right_to_hire_a_l.html

    --Jparsons 21:13, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


    • Dave Panzarino
    • Elevator Pitch


    For my project, I would like to create illustrative, self-reflexive, works about copyright and intellectual property.


    The idea is to either actually create or to propose the construction of media which test the limits of current law. Good source material would include "Remix" by Lawrence Lessig, "Wealth of Networks" by Yochai Benkler, the Copyright Act of 1976, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the Audio Home Recording Act, section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, many instances of case law including Kahle v. Gonzales, Golan v. Gonzales, Folsom v. Marsh, Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios, and websites devoted to this subject like the Swarthmore Coalition for the creative Commons and the Chilling Effect Clearinghouse .

    The copyright and intellectual property questions come from the user's perspective and from the creator's perspective. I want to figure out when a person is breaking the law by using what information, and how they might use it, and also to ask how someone can reasonably expect to maintain control over information of their own making, and what qualifies information as such. These issues would require exploration of such ideas as transformation, derivation, parody, satire, mashup, spinoffs, sampling, notice and takedown, file-sharing, public domain, and commercial use.

    In the context of "generativity," I would like to summarize what the law defines as an original creation. Is there a discrepancy between what is original and what a creator can own or exclusively monetize? What is illegal information? I think the most efficient approach to this project would be an essay accompanied by a series of poems. I am making a song built from media samples for my media project, but limiting to small text pieces could isolate the conceptual and legal content nicely -for example, have a short poem which I could distribute to class, but couldn't sell, and have the subject be about why that is, and then have a poem that I could sell, but not in Utah, or one that could be uploaded but not downloaded, depending on its content. There might be poems I couldn't even take outdoors!


    --Dave 24 February 2009 (UTC)

    Name : Portia Darby Pitch: Technology, Religion and the End Times


    For many years people have been predicting the outcome of the end of time and the chronological order of signs that will lead up to that day through series of events . As time evolve slowly but certainly the human species is loosing it power and ability to govern and maintain control over and of our productivity . Technology has been evolving and leading the way through deveopments and science. Could this be th end of time for human activity and authority? Technology has evovled so rapidly that it replaces jobs that humans once could operate . Technonology forms a sytem that pre arranges order and obtians its significant amount of control . The development of technology is so systematicaly organized that it forms forms its own entity , or must I say society with no rules , boundaries, and have many stakes that come along with it such as the invation of privacy. The world of technology may just be envading and taking over this real biological planet earth , and it may just be the ending of human productivy , and ability to sustain without the use of technology . which could possiblity serve as a monitoring instrument used to monitor human activity along with tracking , to keep everything systematicaly organize leading to a one world solution . Would it be safe to say that onday technology would control the human species. Though many people and philosophers have there opinion to whats to happen during the end times chronicals , could we be living in the latter days of a One power One government ruling of all nations through this magnificant development of technology? There’s evidence all around us that these could be our ladder days of the appraoching times , but in addition to this case work religious faiths will evaluated along with political attempt to influence or control.

    Reference: http://www.mt.net/~watcher/ http://www.city-data.com/forum/religion-philosophy/330615-fascination-end-times-12.html http://www.watchmanbiblestudy.com/Topics/EarthChanges.htm http://www.mt.net/~watcher/april30.html --Portia Darby 22:05, 24 February 2009 (UTC)Portia D

    • Name: David Cooperstein
    • Pitch: Despite much evidence to the contrary, John Perry Barlow's vision of the internet is still a viable concept.

    I would like to examine the current state of the internet in relation to the vision presented by John Perry Barlow in 1996. Although his vision may appear to be short sighted and idealistic, I believe that a purely pragmatic analysis would reveal that his ideas are completely viable. I would also go so far as to say that the ideas set forth in his writing are both inevitable and necessary to maintain a stable and productive internet. I intend to disprove two of the main branches of censorship ideology to illustrate that Barlow's claims were neither shortsighted nor unrealistic. The two areas of focus will be the level of need to censor the internet and the level of ability that governments, private entities, and other special interests have to effectively censor the internet. I see neither need nor ability in regard to censoring the internet. Among the many areas of the application of censorship that I will examine, there are a few extremely notable cases. One of the most pertinent cases is the self defeating campaign that is being waged by various copyright enforcement groups. The examples presented by the bulk of the data on these groups relates to both government entities as well as private entities just as it reflects on both the necessity of censorship alongside the ability to censor. I see these cases as one exhibit of proof in John Perry Barlow's conclusion that interference with this new self governing, global entity is merely inconvenient and not of a permanent nature. I also intend to focus on another notable example of internet intervention that has been the subject of much hype and little result. This example is the excessive fear mongering over safety that is used to encourage parents to restrict children's access to this great new resource that just happens to threaten the rule of conventional authorities. Despite all evidence of greater dangers and ineffective measures to limit the danger at hand, there is still a great emphasis on keeping kids off of the internet for their safety. The efforts that have been used to “protect” children at the expense of freedom and information are flawed in concept and ineffective in execution. They are merely ploys to distract attention from real problems and attract a popular consensus that the internet can and must be censored. I feel that by examining issues such as those above, there is a very reasonable rational backing Barlow's ideas. The internet is difficult to censor, and the causes that call for censorship are weak. I see a scattered field of isolated calls for censorship that are vague attempts to gather public support for private causes, not public good. Despite isolated instances of censorship, Barlow's ideas have so far remained largely intact. Although his ideas seem idealistic, I feel that the above instances prove his theory on the overall longevity of the free internet.

    • Name: Lincoln
    • Pitch: legal language on the internet

    The last time you gave your name to a website, did you read the terms of use? Did you even skim it? I bet you did the First time you signed up for one of these things, but everyone I know stopped even skimming after round two. The vastness o the internet has caused an immense amount of people to begin agreeing to these complex legal documents over quite trivial matters. I know I have. But their complex nature means that even if we did read them, it is probable that we wouldn’t understand even if we did read them. However, as markets and databases and everything else progresses on the internet, it will become increasingly important and necessary for normal people to be able to easily understand these documents.

    Unfortunately, the forces that cause it to be necessary for us to know them also cause them to be complex. So the easy solution of making them simpler won’t work (legal language in the united states is more exact than anywhere else. Ever heard the joke “How many Americans does it take to screw in a light bulb?” “THAT’S NOT FUNNY! I’M SUEING!”). I believe that the internet must and will create a new kind of legal language that will have a basis in the long, complex speech of the present, but will be more accessible to those who aren’t fluent in legal speech.




    • Name: William Traylor


    • Pitch: Net Neutral Municipal Wireless with Commerical Differentiated IP Transit

    My project will hinge on the confluence of open source wireless spectrum and the notion of net neutrality. I will likely argue for a partially democratized internet. The network policy would follow a local/inter-city model similar to what happened to the Bell system after divestiture in 1984. The argument will also align the broadband policy recommendations that the new president ushered in with his campaign.

    Localized wireless metro networks funded federally, along with municipal money. There would be 3 tiers of metro wireless network (big city, mid city, rural coop) and these would be operated by a national oversight and monitoring relationship with the CTO office within Homeland security. The city based wireless networks would be net neutral, open access, and available to all. Although homeland security, telemedicine, universities, schools, government, and K-12 educational entities would have preferential access. General Citizens could gain access but would be afforded available bandwidth after these agencies and organizations were provided use.

    These wireless metro networks would be tied together with commercial access or IP transit from the carriers (AT&T/Verizon/Sprint).

    There is a wealth of coverage for these items as separate function or policy recommendations. Net neutrality is a heated item over the last few years. Municipal wireless is an idea or policy that never fully took root. There were a few city governments that delivered pilot deployments, but never really made them a commercial reality.

    I will take the best of breed thought leadership in these spaces to deliver a compelling recommendation that blends government interest, citizen access, commercial interests, and the proper evolution of technolgy.


    References:

    • Name: Anteneh Baymeta
    • Pitches: This project will evaluate claims on the negative and positive impact of internet filtering policy with reference to Ethiopia.

    Internet technologies are good for less developed countries (LDCs), both in terms of their prospects for political democratization and in relation to economic development and equality because inequity is often perpetuated and worsened by their debt burden, by wealthy countries’ unfair trade policies, by limited aid and by a generally unequal power relationship with the West. Their economic struggle is a result of colonization, which left behind a legacy of dependency and instability. This is true even in Ethiopia, where the case in favour of this argument seems most contentious. This Project will evaluate claims on the negative and positive impact of internet filtering policy with reference to Ethiopia.

    I argue that internet technologies need to be enhanced if poverty is to be reduced and other social targets are to be achieved. Similarly, development requires major changes in policies and institutions at the global, as well as at the national level. Therefore, Internet technologies are good for LDC’s, both in terms of their prospects for political democratization and in relation to economic development and equality.

    To support this argument, first I will explain the telecommunications reform in Ethiopia. Second, I will discuss the contexts in which access regulation, and internet technologies adoption in Ethiopia. Finally, I will conclude on the implication of internet technologies in Ethiopia’s prospects for political democratization and economic development.

    Bibliography

    • Alemayehu, Kibret. 1985. Price Policy and Revenue Effectiveness of Tariff Rates in the Ethiopian Telecommunication Authority. Addis Ababa.
    • Coglianese, Cary. “The Internet and Public Participation in Rulemaking.” Regulatory Policy Program, Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School of Government, 2003.
    • Lessig, Lawrence. Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace. New York: Basic Books, 1999
    • Norris, Pippa. Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide, Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2001.


    -- A.Baymeta --Abyssinia 00:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

    • Name: Shivaji
    • Pitch: Direct Musician Donation Service

    The music industry in my opinion has experienced pros and cons due to the increase in internet users all across the world. On one hand, people everywhere can accesses their favorite artists website or myspace page to keep up with news and reviews creating new marketing opportunities. As helpful as this has been, it has not been able to overcome the lost revenue caused by listeners downloading the would be purchased album for free.

    Listeners should have the integrity to support their favorite artist in the store but the fact is that you can go to google and find almost any song or album for free and this doesn't even touch on the simplicity of P2P programs. The problem I see is that this only effects the pockets of certain people. Artists who sell millions of albums, and get plenty of media coverage do not have to worry about some of their fans downloading their albums. The artists who were either independent or were almost famous did not have that luxury during the move to file sharing. Most of the time it is already difficult to find albums by artists under independent record labels and people who have access to the internet would rather get a random song for free then pay for it at the itunes store, if the itunes store even has the song. Also, there are many fans who would like to support the artists directly rather than through record labels who take the majority of revenue.

    From what I have found on the internet, their is no way to pay any artist directly but I think, with the amount of free music that is on the internet already, artists should be able to collect some money through donation. People do not want to pay $15 for an itunes album but there are probably many who would be willing to donate $5 directly to an artist for access to their music.

    For my project, I would like to figure out a method where internet-using music fans could access an updated data base with their favorite artists tracks and be able to donate how ever much money they would like. I feel this would not only please music fans and artists, but it would give hope to artists who think they don't want to conform to a record labels wishes.

    Name: Roberto Soto Pitch: The evolutions of Online News Media from Tabloids to potential deterrent for white collar crime

    Imagine for a moment if investors, vendors or employees knew more about a company then what is posted on their site or on news from press releases. Today’s business news is a carefully orchestrated communication releases. That creates a real dilemma for investors, employees and vendors who can not trust the news and as a result can not properly allocate the potential risk associated with doing business.

    Today business professional read the traditional newspapers such as the Wall Street Journal and a variety of sites including Yahoo finance, Money.com, etc. The information on the paper is good and provides a common vehicle to assess business risk. However, the information comes from carefully selected sources, such as court records, public records and press releases. There is no maverick in the business journalism trying to find the truth. Even during these difficult economic times.

    As a result of the lack of information companies such as Dealbreaker.com are becoming extremely attractive. Although what they are doing may no seem very important. People, who are in the know and connected, understand their value. Companies such as Dealbreaker.com are providing an outlet for people who are looking for real information about a company. For example, an executive going in out for golf with a vendor may not sound like a big deal, but if you find out that the vendor is a middle of a major contract negotiation that could be a potential risk for the company involved.

    I believe that the natural evolution of sites like dealbreaker.com from a Wall Street tabloid to the next Wall Street Journal of our generation will be inevitable. I believed that in time, Dealbreaker.com will become important assets to company who are trying to determine the risk of other companies.

    Reference: dealbreaker.com en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_street_journal

    Retrieved from "http://cyber.harvard.edu/is2011/?title=Assignment_2_Submissions&oldid=4234"