Creative Commons Licenses Finally Becoming More Common

Creative Commons is a non-profit organization which aims to expand the variety of creative works that are available for others to legally alter, build upon, edit, and share with other individuals. The organization was founded by two men we have learned about throughout the semester, Lawrence Lessig, Eric Eldred, and Hal Albeson. Since the organization was founded in 2001, the licenses have been supported by many people who support the act of the creators of works to have control and rights over how they share and distribute their copyrighted works to the public and licensees.

            The Creative Commons licenses are the copyright licenses that the organization developed for the creators and owners of work to control what rights of the works are reserved, and which are best to be waived in order to benefit citizens other than the creators. These licenses are free to the public, and are very easy to read and understand, that are based on copyright laws. These Creative Commons licenses allow the copyright owner and the licensee to create their own negotiations under the section of the copyright law that states, “All rights reserved,” allowing to the copyright owner to dictate some of their own negotiation of rights.

            Warbreaker is a fantasy novel that is an example of a work that falls under the Creative Commons licenses. The novel was originally written by Brandon Sanderson, who later released a few other rewrites of the novel, releasing one chapter at a time, and now the entire novel is available digitally through Sanderson’s online website. Because this novel is under the Creative Commons license, Sanderson had the ability of publishing the new additions to the book on his own website, rather than through a publisher, without concerns of the copyright laws.

            Move Under Ground is a novel written by Nick Mamatas that is a mash up of a variety of other works including the style of Jack Kerouac, and Cthulhu Mythos by H.P Lovecraft, creating a horror novel with an interesting plot. Mamatas makes multiple references to Kerouac’s On the Road by mentioning the characters of the novel, using some exact phrases, as well as mentioning Kerouac himself. Through the Creative Commons license, this book is available to be read at its website for free download.

            A Briefer History of Time, by Eric Schulman is a humorous parody of the original novel titled, A Brief History of Time by author Stephen Hawking. The cover of the book, as well as the title was parodied from the original, with Schulman detailing what he believed to be the fifty-three most important events of the earth, all characterized in one book. Ironically, I learned, Stephen Hawking wrote a sequel to his book a few years later, and that book he also titled, A Briefer History of Time, at first without realizing the parody that was written of his original novel. Schulman’s novel is aimed at teaching the public on actual events, while also allowing the reader to laugh and joke with the simplest aspects of life, such as “why, even though the Universe is expanding, it doesn’t get any easier to find a parking space,” (Schulman). This novel is available under the Creative Commons Attribution- Share Alike License, which I will go into detail about now.

            The Creative Commons license is a public copyright license that helps enable the free distribution of the copyrighted work from the creator of the work to the licensees. There are four different baseline rights of Creative Commons licenses that are attribution, share-alike, non-commercial, and no derivative works. Each different type of right for a license has different icons that symbolize the purpose of the right. These are then used to create a total of sixteen different combinations, six of which are the regularly used licenses.

            The six regularly used Creative Commons licenses are as follows: Attribution alone, Attribution- No Derivatives, Attribution- Share Alike, Attribution- Noncommercial, Attribution- Noncommercial- No Derivatives, and Attribution- Noncommercial- Share Alike. Each of these licenses controls certain rights for the owner of the copyright as well as the licensees.

            The Creative Commons Attribution- Share Alike license allows individuals to share, copy, alter, remix and distribute a work so long as the altered work is attributed to the author or owner of the original that is specified, without suggesting that they supported the creation of your personal work. Basically, this means that you do not need to ask permission of the owner or creator of the original work, but you must give credit where credit is due, and acknowledge the fact that ideas, characters, etc. are from another individual’s work, not purely your own. Additionally, if the work is altered in any way from the original, that is, remixed, transformed, etc. the work may only be distributed if the license of the original work is the same, or similar in any way. Under each of the five others, the requirements are slightly different to apply to the different varieties of licenses.

            I chose to discuss this type of Creative Commons license because it is one of the most common, if not the most common type of license used. The requirements for this type of license are basic. Each of the three listed novels above are examples of the Attribution- Share Alike Creative Commons license, accrediting the original versions of each, as well as allowing the distribution to occur on individual websites.

            The Creative Commons licenses are useful and important because they allow the creator of a work to select which rights they reserve, and which can be waived to benefit the recipients of the work, or other individuals who wish to alter the work in some way. It is crucial to remember that these licenses are based upon copyright, not in place of it, because this is where many individuals accidently misuse the licenses. Lawrence Lessig strongly believes that work needs to be less strictly copyrighted so that individuals have the capability of making new creative works, allowing collaboration between individuals and already published works. The Creative Commons licenses provide potential interaction between the copyright owner and the licensees, and are becoming increasingly accepted by the public.

"Creative Commons." Creative Commons United States. 2013. 29 Nov. 2013 
        <http://us.creativecommons.org/>.
"Creative Commons." Wikipedia. 2013. 30 Nov. 2013. 
        <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons>.
"History." Creative Commons. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Nov. 2013.

Remember Me?

http://mentalfloss.com/article/53792/17-ancient-abandoned-websites-still-

This is a list of seventeen websites that are once popular, now abandoned websites that still work, people just forgot about them. I personally remembered the Space Jam website as well as the Amanda Please website.

I think it's interesting that when something is placed on the Internet, or a website is created, like energy, it is never really destroyed. Even if a website is not maintained, or is not visited for years, it still exists, and someone can still reach the website if they are really trying to. I remember using Neopets, and other websites that are probably no where near as popular now as they were when I was a child, but they still exist.

The semi-permanence that websites have on the Internet is both appealing and frightening. Some websites should not exist forever, but they inevitably will. The website I created in middle school still exists, and was almost too easily found when I googled it. I wish that would stay far more hidden in the depths of the Internet. On the other hand, the Internet is so reliable in its ability to keep information and websites, that it is a great storage place so that information, photographs, etc. cannot be easily destroyed, even if a computer or piece of technology goes down.

The Internet's a Crazy Place, Kids

http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/a-fifth-grade-teacher-wanted-to-show-her-students-what-happe

This article explains how a teacher of a fifth grade class was attempting to teach a lesson on what happens when you upload your picture to the Internet, a place where anyone can do anything to it. The lesson proved to be extremely valuable, since in a mere 24 hour time period, the photograph was shared on Facebook over thirteen thousand times, and many people from many countries spanning the globe have made alterations to the photograph, demonstrating the teacher's point exactly.

The series of photoshopped, and altered images began in a mild tone, with simple aspects changed. First the language of the text on the sheet of paper was altered, and slowly the images trickled into the person holding the sheet of paper to be changed. There were some animal face swaps, some radical sign swaps, and of course a series of Nicholas Cage swaps. People became very crafty, demonstrating very obviously to her students that the Internet is a very creative place, however it really is important to be careful what is uploaded to the Internet, because once it's out there, it is almost impossible to get it back with no one seeing it, no one altering it.

I think the idea of this teacher was a very successful one, because within 24 hours she showed all that can happen to one photograph being placed onto the Internet through the social media. I don't think this teacher anticipated quite the response that was gathered, further proving the lesson to be a success. The Internet is a wild and miraculous place, where truly anything can happen.

Faith in Internet Restored

http://www.buzzfeed.com/summeranne/stories-that-will-restore-your-faith-in-the-internet

This article is titled, "21 Stories that will Restore your Faith in the Internet," first implying that faith in the Internet has been lost along the way somewhere, and second, ensuring that these 21 stories are all significant in some way, which after reading the article, they absolutely were.

Each of these stories shows the capabilities that the Internet has to offer us that save, change, and enhance the lives of people/animals/society at large. My favorite stories began with the "Batkid" article, where a five year old child with cancer was given an entire day to be his favorite superhero, and save the city of San Francisco. The news spread on Twitter, the social media website of what was going to happen, and so many people wanted to help, that the entire city turned into Gotham city for the day, and this little boy's dreams came true.

Another story that I thought was particularly special was the Redditor who posted that his uncle with down syndrome was dying and always loved getting mail, so he would appreciate a letter or two from strangers who would be willing to send him letters to open up in bed. Not only did a few letters come to this man, over a thousand letters and gifts were sent to him, and he was extremely happy.

The majority of these stories were successful through the use of social media to reach a wide audience. If it wasn't for these social media outlets such as Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, etc. to find these lost dogs, the lost families, as well as to send out simple requests. The power of the social media is undeniable in that if word needs to be spread quickly, it will be spread through the overwhelming use of social media sites.

Although I use the Internet and social media websites everyday, I still find it strange that they have such power to do amazing things in our everyday lives. For some people, the Internet can completely change their life, whether it helps them find their long lost family, or helps them fund a tremendous want or need, or enhances their life in some other way. The Internet can be a cruel place with bullying, and strangers being mean for no reason at all, but it can also be filled with trust, hope, and people who genuinely want to help the world, and this article really helps us remember how.

Amazon on Sundays

http://www.buzzfeed.com/sapna/amazon-will-start-sunday-deliveries-in-new-york-and-los-ange

This article explains that the world's largest online retailer has made a deal with the United States Postal Service so that packages will now be delivered on Sundays as well as every other day of the week.

Because the U.S Postal Service has lost billions of dollars throughout the past few years now that sending mail is less prevalant. Amazon charges $79 a year for it's Prime Users who pay for 2-day express shipping, so Amazon wants to be able to ship packages on Sunday to fulfill that request of the customers.

This year in particular is a smart time for Amazon to partner with the U.S Postal Service because like the article states there are six less days between Thanksgiving and Christmas this year, so the competition for purchasing gifts is going to be higher than average. Amazon made this deal at the perfect time because people will be more likely to make purchases from Amazon knowing that they can receive packages on Sundays rather than waiting extra days to receive them. People will also be more likely to join the Prime Membership so that they can receive the 2-day express shipping during the holiday season, and can receive these packages on a Sunday if they were purchased on a Friday.

I thought this article was interesting because the Internet that changed the Postal Service so much, is now mingling with them again, attempting to find a happy medium between the two different outlets. The Internet, or Amazon specifically, is not only trying to help themselves, but is also trying to help the Postal Service earn back some of the money loss it has acquired over the last few years, to once again becoming successful, and a reliable, easy way to receive purchased goods.

Twitter Break Up

http://postgradproblems.com/this-guy-live-tweeted-his-neighbors-breakup-and-it-was-amazing/

This article explains that a comedian was on his rooftop when a couple came up there, got into an argument, and broke up, all while he was live tweeting the entire situation. I found this story to be extremely hilarious, with the perfect quotes from the couple themselves, the hashtags of the comedian, and the story in general, but it also made me feel slightly bad for the couple and the lack of privacy. Although they were on the rooftop, fully aware that there was a stranger in their presence, a breakup, and relationship in general is very personal, and this one was broadcast for the entire world to see.

One of the most favored aspects of Twitter is the fact that it can be used to present live and expedient information to the public, however, the idea of that stemmed from news, or important news rather than this raw, personal interaction. The capabilities of Twitter are clearly very prominent, and this article helps explain why Twitter is so successful whether it is used for important information, or as a humurous article. Nevertheless, I think Rachel and her boyfriend did not expect to be online Twitter sensations through their vocal breakup.

The Smart Phone Has It All

This video demonstrates thirty different objects that you no longer need because the smart phone was invented. Although I know the smart phone has seemingly limitless possibilities, it was crazy to me to see it all in a row. It's weird to see all of the different items that people used to carry around separately, and to realize that all of the items are encapsulated into this one tiny device.

When I think of cell phones, even smart phones, I instinctively just think of telephone, texting, Internet, and games, without thinking of any of the other applications are included like a flashlight, thermometer, compass, calculator etc. It still to this day is amazing what capabilities smart phones have in progressing technology, as well as updating old school technology as well.

Online is Creepy in Real Life

This video is mocks the use of social media, and how there are certain things that people post online, that if they were to announce in person, in the real-world the same way, would be unbelievably odd. The first one is "broadcast your relationship." Everyone knows that when a relationship is "Facebook Official" it means that the relationship has officially began, but before that, there must have been some ambiguity to it.

The second example is "fight with strangers" which as we explained when we discussed people leaving comments on YouTube, people feel disconnected from other people through the computer screen and therefore leave comments and start fights with strangers for no reason at all.

The third example is "publicly liking things". On Facebook, people "like" random pages on Facebook whether it is a musical group, random hobbies, or completely random topics. People do so publicly, and then to go one step further, other people can "like" the fact that you "liked" something.

The fourth example is "overshare" where people can share pictures, ideas, etc. repeatedly to the world. This happens so much online because people don't have the ability to tell people it's annoying, or that they already spoke of that topic etc.

The fifth example is "follow" which when expressed in this video, is obviously the creepiest thing.  Simply because you have a similar interest, or you don't actually know the person at all, you simply think they're cool you deliberately "follow" them, not something that would ever be considered normal in person.

The final example is "be really honest" which is when people feel detached, and therefore post their true feelings online when they normally wouldn't necessarily be able to in person. Now that Facebook incorporated feelings into status updates, this also eases the ability to be honest, or divulge their personal information to the world.

Jimmy Fallon #MOMTEXTS

Every week on Jimmy Fallon's show he has a segment where he posts on Twitter a hash tag and then waits to receive people's responses. People submit their responses, and then Jimmy Fallon chooses the best or funniest responses. In this episode, the hash tag that he sent out was #MomTexts which led to some pretty fantastic responses about mothers and their lack of knowledge of technology.

One of the first responses was from a mom that did not know what a "less than three" meant when it formed a heart. The second mother texted the child saying that "Aunt Mary died. Lol." thinking that "LOL" stood for "lots of love" rather than "laugh out loud". Another of the responses stated that the child had "received 12 consecutive completely empty text bubbles from [her]  mom the other day. Apparently she was trying to unlock her phone." One of my personal favorites was the one that said, "my mom couldn't figure out punctuation so she would type it out: "how are you question mark," which is a perfect example of people of older generations trying to figure out technology that they are unused to.

This entire video made me think of our class and how even if someone isn't used to a form of technology, it is almost crucial to join so that they can stay connected with the rest of the world, and younger generations. It makes me think of all of the parents and grandparents joining Facebook and Twitter to stay connected.

My grandmother bought a laptop and a cellphone just because she wanted the new technologies, and she then got a Facebook, and she calls me and my siblings regularly trying to figure out how to comment on pictures, or to make a status. It is the most frustrating thing in the world trying to explain technology to her but I think her generation is trying to learn how to be youthful, and experience technology the way we are.

I think that this video was overall really entertaining, and really representative of the direction technology is heading with the older and younger generations.

Viacom International Inc. vs. Youtube Inc.

In 2007, the company Viacom International sued Google-owned company, YouTube, claiming that it engaged in extensive copyright infringement. They claimed that YouTube had allowed users to upload videos that were strictly owned by Viacom. There were over 150,000 clips taken from the Viacom website and published onto YouTube, and during the time that these clips were online at YouTube, they were collectively viewed over 1.5 billion times.

Viacom has a policy with copyrights, and they believed that YouTube deliberately breached this policy by "performing, displaying, and reproducing" the copyrighted works of Viacom. YouTube on the other hand claimed that it did not infringe on any of the copyright regulations of Viacom, and that they did nothing wrong.

The court case ended with Viacom winning, and because they did not seek any damages from Google, the judge warranted that the materials be returned back to Viacom, as well as the details on all of the people who had watched the videos, like the trafficking reports, which caused problems of its own. This court decision caused people to be concerned with the fact that the website could find direct individuals based on the IP addresses, as well as the time viewed, and the login name. Many criticized the ruling saying that it was a "setback to privacy rights" however the judge maintained the decision saying that Google was required to give all of the information. Eventually Viacom and YouTube came to the decision to keep the individual's privacy, and that YouTube would hand over materials anonymously.

Although the court case was very long and confusing, and is still somewhat in the news, it demonstrates that even very well-known companies can get into trouble through simple copyright issues. Stealing others' work is always judged harshly, and it is crucial that companies and individuals be careful when citing or attempting to use works of others. I thought this court case was interesting because it was with companies so well-known. As a viewer of this case, I would have thought that YouTube never would have wanted to deal with a copyright issue like this, however because they thought there was no issue with copyright infringement, they continued, but eventually did get into trouble and had to remove the clips from their website.