I went to see Sonny Rollins play at the Lincoln Center Out of Doors free concert series tonight; it was terrific. Rollins is a legend of jazz, and it’s clear why — he’s a virtuoso on the sax, and his music has an uplifting beat that keeps everyone tapping their feet (except for the annoying woman four or five down from me, on her cellphone).

MSNBC has a neat article about the elusive quest for proof that prions are the cause of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (a.k.a. mad cow disease). For those less-scientific out there, the big problem with the theory is that it’s been a well-accepted notion for centuries that only organisms with genes — viruses, bacteria, etc. — can spread disease; prions are just proteins. It’s fascinating work trying to prove or disprove the prion theory.

Genius. The only thing it needs is a randomizer. (Credit to MetaFilter for the link…)

Props to Dan for the pretty swanky redesign.

It’s about time — Verio is being sued by Register.com, alleging that the ISP harvested information out of the WHOIS database and used it for marketing, cold-calls, and solicitations. Every time I get a call that’s clearly based on the information I was required to give to register domains, I wish that I had perfected that button that I press that vaporizes the person at the other end of the phone.

It appears that AOL has decided to remove the spyware features from SmartDownload.

Steve Ross throws out the conjecture that nobody’s proven that sharing copyrighted music is illegal, so thus the media’s biased against Napster by repeatedly referring to the predominant use of it as “piracy.” I’d love to respond to this, and do so on his site, but he’s been so kind as to disable posting by members, thus leaving his word as manna, uncontestable, so I’m doing so here. My response: my message from three days ago. Why does Steve believe that intellectual property belongs to him, and to all of society? Can I take his site, copy its contents exactly, and reproduce them here? Does he claim rights to the code that I’ve written? Artists create their music, and they get to determine what to do with it. If they determine to sign a contract that then gives recording companies the right to determine the future of the music, then that’s their choice; it’s also the law.

Comments

Artists create their music, and they get to determine what to do with it.

Something in me is saying that I’ve seen this in a performance art piece somewhere before.

The artist determines the ultimate disposal of a work of art by creating it, giving the public a hint of it, and then very publicly destroying it.

I don’t know if this is the tormented artist in me or if it’s been done before. It just seems germane to the discussion.

eric

• Posted by: eric soroos on Aug 5, 2000, 2:08 AM

Jason it’s quite possible that it is fair use. His complaint is with reporters, and he asks a fair question. They’re supposed to be impartial, yet they seem not to be. As a freedom-loving American, this is a bigger concern to me than anything you’ve raised on your site. Thanks for listening.

• Posted by: Dave Winer on Aug 5, 2000, 10:32 AM

Is it possible that it’s fair use for people to take a copy of Frontier off of an FTP server that I set up? (This is derivative of a notion I’ve raised with you before, with no response; I only raise this because of your similar entreaties to have the issues you raise answered.)

Is it possible that it’s fair use for people to come photocopy my Harry Potter series in its entirety?

Can you possibly justify the notion that it’s fair use for people to take something they don’t own without paying for it, and with no agreement by the person who owns the ultimate rights to that thing that it’s OK to take it without paying for it? All I’m asking for is a logical explanation; just because there hasn’t been a final ruling by a court doesn’t mean I’m not allowed to apply logic, reasoning, precedent, and common sense to this.

And lastly, as for the reporters’ purported bias, do you really feel that the media coverage has been wholly biased? Take a look at your Napster weblog; it seems to me like there’s a pretty damn good representation of fair reporting there. Don’t paint an entire industry with a single brush; likewise, don’t tolerate others who do that.

/jason

• Posted by: Jason Levine on Aug 5, 2000, 1:25 PM

That’s exactly the idea behind much of performance art — the artist’s control over their work, the message it sends, and its reach. I like that you’ve brought this to the table; it actually makes part of this much easier to understand and explain.

(Tortured artist…?)

/jason

• Posted by: Jason Levine on Aug 5, 2000, 1:27 PM

Jason, to answer the question on your home page, there are fair uses for downloading a whole website, in toto, the search engines do it, and Google even caches the pages so if the site goes away you can still get the information.

All the negotiating you do, hypotheticals you ask about, miss the point, imho. I wrote a rather long bit about this today, rather than repeat myself, I ask that you just read it. Thanks.

http://scriptingnews.userland.com/backIssues/2000/08/05#ericRaymondOnNapster

I understand that you’re busy, I find your reports on your experiences at the hospital fascinating, but there’s a lot going on that you know nothing about if you haven’t used Napster.

• Posted by: Dave Winer on Aug 5, 2000, 3:43 PM

One thing I forgot to respond to is your question about Frontier. We provide a 60-day free trial for it, so we’re already doing for Frontier what Napster does for music.

• Posted by: Dave Winer on Aug 5, 2000, 4:00 PM

We provide a 60-day free trial for it, so we’re already doing for Frontier what Napster does for music.

Pardon my French, but bullshit. Napster doesn’t provide 60-day trials for music, it provides free music. If you choose to go to a record store or online site to buy the music sometime within 60 days after freeloading, then that’s a conscious decision on your part, not something that Napster does, enforces, or even encourages.

Now, to take a quote from your home page and replace a key word:

“So, after you finish telling me about right and wrong (I’ve heard it 80K times), you could then choose to use your imagination and consider all the inspiration, serendipity, even synchronicity that comes from massive numbers of people sharing their software discoveries.”

I think that you can agree with me that your next statement in that quite, that music is not like software, is a personal observation, not something that is necessarily universal. There are pieces of software out there, Manila being one of them, that are just as inspirational as any piece of music that I’ve heard; likewise, any creative work — be it a book, a song, a program, a painting, a thesis, a sofa — has the power to be inspirational to someone.

And even if you don’t want to agree that software can be equated to music in your quote today, then it’s pretty hard to argue that movies should fit into the same paradigm. Should I be able to buy a DVD, copy it onto my computer, and send it to all my friends? Hard to support, ethically or legally.

Thus, if I should be allowed to share my inspirational discoveries, then I’ve got copies of Manila for everyone. Hell, Gnutella/Gnotella shares non-MP3 files… but, then again, I don’t share things. I think I’ve made that pretty clear.

• Posted by: Jason Levine on Aug 5, 2000, 4:32 PM

…there’s a lot going on that you know nothing about if you haven’t used Napster.

I’m glad that you asked me to read the Eric Raymond bit and the assumption that critics haven’t used Napster, because I wanted to respond to it anyway.

It’s interesting how you make the assumption that Eric and I haven’t used Napster. I can’t speak for him, but I have used it, mainly because I feel that I can’t write about it without knowing what it does and doesn’t do. So be wary of making assumptions; in my case, they aren’t true.

That being said, how does anything you say apply to someone who has used it and still disagrees with you?

And lastly, as far as I know only Google actually caches pages, so I’m not even going to waste time telling you that other search engines don’t reproduce my content without my consent. And as for Google, it’s easy to tell them not to cache my pages, again reinforcing that it’s my content, and I get to choose what to do with it.

• Posted by: Jason Levine on Aug 5, 2000, 4:39 PM

It’s all personal observations, and Jason, bullshit is in the eye of the beholder. Perhaps you’ve been living in NY too long.

• Posted by: Dave Winer on Aug 5, 2000, 4:56 PM

You can disagree with me.

And if you’ve used Napster, then you must have done something wrong?

I’m soooooooo confused!!

• Posted by: Dave Winer on Aug 5, 2000, 4:57 PM

Perhaps you’ve been living in NY too long.

Whatever.

But perhaps you’ve never taken a basic logic and reasoning class, since you have yet to refute the notion that I should be allowed to give free copies of Frontier to everyone who asks.

Time to fire up Gnutella and share some inspirational applications, don’t you think?

• Posted by: Jason Levine on Aug 5, 2000, 5:07 PM

Whatever turns you on.

• Posted by: Dave Winer on Aug 5, 2000, 5:11 PM
Please note that comments automatically close after 60 days; the comment spammers love to use the older, rarely-viewed pages to work their magic. If comments are closed and you want to let me know something, feel free to use the contact page!