This author is talking about the copyright between works and fans. Copyright is well-known right which can not be invaded in order to protect creators and thier works. These days it is common news which reports abot illigal downloading, such as copyrighted musics, videos etc... However, on this paper, the author is forcus on fans.
I really understand the feeling of fans who try to use a material for own works, and share them by showign to other fans. Of course, this is not for benefit, but just sharing the feeling. The author says these acttivities of fans has been getting powerful media.This is invansion of copyrighted works, but it does not always brign some damage on creators and thier wokds, also some times, this movement shows the popuilarity of works. Author says this huge oppularity is culture. To be recoganized as culture, it shoule have the thing everybody knows its oroginal value.
Finally author concludes, it would be necessary fro creators to colloborate with such a freiendlly fan's activity. Today, I visited YouTube then found one video clip, which was about to celebrate Johon Lennon's 70th birthday created by Yoko Ono. In the video, she says please likn up message video to celebrate it together. Many artists post videos to say happy birthday to Johon. In one of video which I watched, french artist was singing a song"Give Peace a Chance". Is this invansion of copyright? No, I don't think so. This reason is very unclear, but the singer was singing the song to celebrate, not to invade the right. In order make the collaboration with fans possible, it must be necessary to cover such unclear matters. And this is the most dificcult point, i think.
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Week7 Reading Review (All):
The most familier open source for me is wikipedia, which is very useful to check out someting.
One of the features of wikipedia is anyone who has internet access can use it as free. If user don't have to pay money to use the soft ware, what's the differnce from free soft ware?
People can download or use free soft ware, like as open source. This soft ware is availabel as completed thing. The word "Free" of free soft ware is used to mean that people do not have to pay for its using. On the othe hand, oepn source is free to use, and also welcome people to joiun to creative side. This means open source is not only free for use, but also shared to make it impleve or developped by general users. This is the reason why it is called "open".
Then, the software which people buy is going to be dead? I do not think so. Think about "wikipedia", the daily access peopbably would be huge number, but we can not use as proper information reference. The trustablibity is still low. On the other hand the soft ware or source which people have to pay can be recognized more reliable, becasue creators have to have much responsibility to show in public. In other words, they offer differnt features. Also the important thing that user have to understand these differnce, and use them depend on the situation and cases.
One of the features of wikipedia is anyone who has internet access can use it as free. If user don't have to pay money to use the soft ware, what's the differnce from free soft ware?
People can download or use free soft ware, like as open source. This soft ware is availabel as completed thing. The word "Free" of free soft ware is used to mean that people do not have to pay for its using. On the othe hand, oepn source is free to use, and also welcome people to joiun to creative side. This means open source is not only free for use, but also shared to make it impleve or developped by general users. This is the reason why it is called "open".
Then, the software which people buy is going to be dead? I do not think so. Think about "wikipedia", the daily access peopbably would be huge number, but we can not use as proper information reference. The trustablibity is still low. On the other hand the soft ware or source which people have to pay can be recognized more reliable, becasue creators have to have much responsibility to show in public. In other words, they offer differnt features. Also the important thing that user have to understand these differnce, and use them depend on the situation and cases.
Saturday, October 2, 2010
Week6 Reading Review (ALL2):Social network(ing) sites.revisiting the story so far: A response to danah boyd & Nicole Ellison
This reading is answering to danah boyd and Nicole Ellison.
On the paper of boyd and Nicole say, they talk about SNS by separating offline friendship and online friend ship. On the other hand, this author, Beer says the way of boyd and Nicole to analys SNS is not wrong, but he suggests that we must study it by including more aspect of people's real life(on line). In other words, we shold have pay more attention to the point how people brought their real life into social networking websites, and how social networking has been refrecting it.
I storongly agree with the idea of Beer "we might need to engage with sociological studies of friendship to understand how friend ship changes as it interfaces with such technologoes." This technologies means SNSs.
Looking at my social networking activities, on line friendship of mine is directly from my offline friend ship. In order to analys my SNS, on line and offline can not be separated. Of course, it is also true that the way of using and purpose, and activities on SNS would be different person to person. However, the important thing is to see how real life activity and web life activity are interacting eachother.
On the paper of boyd and Nicole say, they talk about SNS by separating offline friendship and online friend ship. On the other hand, this author, Beer says the way of boyd and Nicole to analys SNS is not wrong, but he suggests that we must study it by including more aspect of people's real life(on line). In other words, we shold have pay more attention to the point how people brought their real life into social networking websites, and how social networking has been refrecting it.
I storongly agree with the idea of Beer "we might need to engage with sociological studies of friendship to understand how friend ship changes as it interfaces with such technologoes." This technologies means SNSs.
Looking at my social networking activities, on line friendship of mine is directly from my offline friend ship. In order to analys my SNS, on line and offline can not be separated. Of course, it is also true that the way of using and purpose, and activities on SNS would be different person to person. However, the important thing is to see how real life activity and web life activity are interacting eachother.
Friday, October 1, 2010
WEEK6 Reading Review:(All)
"Do you have a facebook?" This kind of question is pretty popular among people. Facebook was, first, opened only for Harvard students, and has became oppular among stundets. Today Facebook the most popular SNS and this fenomena have covered all over the world. Not only facebook, many other successful SNSs, such as You Tube, Cyworld and MySpace, have became popular and powerful at same time.
Accroding to boyd, First SNS, six Degrees.com, was lauched 1997. Event hoguh the porpose of each SNSs are differnt, the realtion ship between people and SNS have became stronger and stronger. The main activity on SNS spca is communciation with friends. This measns SNS users have friend ship in real life and in web space(off line and on line). These two are not always exactly same, but it is clear that we need more study about how SNSs have influenced and how SNSs will work on our real life.
I am also SNSs user, and have two different SNS accounts. One is face book and another one is mixi (the biggest Japanese SNS). You may have a question "Do you need these two?". I use facebook to keep in touch with oversee friends, and mixi is for Japanese friends. Thus, my friend ship on SNS is exactly reflected by friend ship in rela life. However, I think SNS has brough some changes on my real friend ship. For example, make it easier to keep in touch friends who are in far away.
There are many type of users whoa have dieerent purposes, and the way of using of SNS are all depend on users.It must be hard, but will be pretty meaningful to study SNS.
Accroding to boyd, First SNS, six Degrees.com, was lauched 1997. Event hoguh the porpose of each SNSs are differnt, the realtion ship between people and SNS have became stronger and stronger. The main activity on SNS spca is communciation with friends. This measns SNS users have friend ship in real life and in web space(off line and on line). These two are not always exactly same, but it is clear that we need more study about how SNSs have influenced and how SNSs will work on our real life.
I am also SNSs user, and have two different SNS accounts. One is face book and another one is mixi (the biggest Japanese SNS). You may have a question "Do you need these two?". I use facebook to keep in touch with oversee friends, and mixi is for Japanese friends. Thus, my friend ship on SNS is exactly reflected by friend ship in rela life. However, I think SNS has brough some changes on my real friend ship. For example, make it easier to keep in touch friends who are in far away.
There are many type of users whoa have dieerent purposes, and the way of using of SNS are all depend on users.It must be hard, but will be pretty meaningful to study SNS.
Week 5 Reading Review: all
This author argues the paradox of today’s media. The trend of today’s trend is “customisation”. He has some examples, such as computer and TV, and explains about the paradox.
Customisation can be said personalizing, which allow us to arrange media contents according to our favours or style. The benefit is we do not have to keep and see unnecessary contents or functions. However, he suggests that it isolate us from others. For example, he says internet television offer uncountable programs form all over the world, which show globalization of broadcasting. On the other hand it also another function which analyse users favour and suggests on screen. Usually we call it customisation, but it also can be defined the opposite function to globalizing movement. The author says that we have to pay attention to this paradox.
I have been using mobile phone nearly 10years. When I bought my first mobile phone, it was the beginning of popularization of mobile phone. Compared my first phone and latest one, the biggest difference is I can change the contents or not. Looking at my mp3, it also has same change. This is “customisation” which this author says in this reading. Not only devices, more obvious this trend can be found in website. For example, once you log in to youtube, it analyse users favourite video automatically by the record what user have searched or watched. I am always surprise the recommends because this analysis is pretty correct. Here, same paradox which author mention by using internet television. Youtube is internationally shared website, it is possible to watch overseas videos, also have many video categories. However, it shows my favourite (it is still guessing) on the first page. Sometime, I feel bit annoying when I try to find something new. Like author says, this paradox is still hidden behind of the positive aspects, but I think it is not only me who feels uncomfortable and gored this “customisation”.
Customisation can be said personalizing, which allow us to arrange media contents according to our favours or style. The benefit is we do not have to keep and see unnecessary contents or functions. However, he suggests that it isolate us from others. For example, he says internet television offer uncountable programs form all over the world, which show globalization of broadcasting. On the other hand it also another function which analyse users favour and suggests on screen. Usually we call it customisation, but it also can be defined the opposite function to globalizing movement. The author says that we have to pay attention to this paradox.
I have been using mobile phone nearly 10years. When I bought my first mobile phone, it was the beginning of popularization of mobile phone. Compared my first phone and latest one, the biggest difference is I can change the contents or not. Looking at my mp3, it also has same change. This is “customisation” which this author says in this reading. Not only devices, more obvious this trend can be found in website. For example, once you log in to youtube, it analyse users favourite video automatically by the record what user have searched or watched. I am always surprise the recommends because this analysis is pretty correct. Here, same paradox which author mention by using internet television. Youtube is internationally shared website, it is possible to watch overseas videos, also have many video categories. However, it shows my favourite (it is still guessing) on the first page. Sometime, I feel bit annoying when I try to find something new. Like author says, this paradox is still hidden behind of the positive aspects, but I think it is not only me who feels uncomfortable and gored this “customisation”.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)