Author
|
Topic: virus: Meme Replication = copywrite infringement? (Read 1141 times) |
|
deadletter-j
Initiate  
Gender: 
Posts: 84 Reputation: 5.09 Rate deadletter-j

How many Engstrom's does it take?
|
 |
virus: Meme Replication = copywrite infringement?
« on: 2005-05-17 22:35:00 » |
|
let's suppose the meme of the CoV begins to spread. At what point do we all it to spread without mapping back to the CoV?
Take the ideohazard symbol. If it s up on a website somewhere without reference, is that GOOD or BAD? On the one hand, it shows meme transmission. On the other hand, does it 'mean' what it used to? Does adding associative information grow a meme or detract from some 'pure' meaning that only the author gets to say?
:-b
--- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
Hijacking everything ever knew about anything.
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon     
Gender: 
Posts: 3160 Reputation: 8.23 Rate Blunderov

"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
 |
RE: virus: Meme Replication = copywrite infringement?
« Reply #1 on: 2005-05-18 04:17:35 » |
|
[Blunderov]Legally I suppose Lucifer has at least some common law protections if he should ever feel the need to resort to them.
Perhaps, though, we should be wary of the difference between a symbol and a trademark. I like this Merriam Webster definition of symbol in this context: "An act sound or object having cultural significance and the capacity to excite or objectify a response." A symbol is a cultural thing. A trademark is a commerce thing.
The ideohazard is a graphic symbol. I'm thinking it could be more effective mapped to the phrase 'mind virus' instead of simply 'virus'. This phrase, it seems to me, hits on both the very ancient fear of possession and the very modern notion of the computer virus. I think that Western culture would be very susceptible to this specific association.
And it may be that here is where the core mission of CoV resides; simply to establish the idea of a mind-virus. The ideohazard is our picture of this idea. Being as how there are no other pictures of this idea, it seems likely to be adopted and, once the concept is widely assimilated, develop its own impetus.
The ideohazard would make a great tag for the Baker Street irregulars amongst us. Is there was a way to make an ideohazard character (in a similar way to that with which the smiley picture is created in MS Word) with which we could tag our documents? <looks hopefully around> It seems to me that this is something that that could be both relatively easily achieved and hugely effective. If just the idea of a mind-virus becomes common property we will have achieved a great deal it seems to me. That first domino is all we need or want.
Best Regards.
global_hijack Sent: 18 May 2005 04:35 let's suppose the meme of the CoV begins to spread. At what point do we allow it to spread without mapping back to the CoV?
Take the ideohazard symbol. If it's up on a website somewhere without reference, is that GOOD or BAD? On the one hand, it shows meme transmission. On the other hand, does it 'mean' what it used to? Does adding associative information grow a meme or detract from some 'pure' meaning that only the author gets to say?
--- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
|
|
|
simul
Adept    
Gender: 
Posts: 614 Reputation: 7.06 Rate simul

I am a lama.

|
 |
Re: virus: Meme Replication = copywrite infringement?
« Reply #2 on: 2005-05-18 17:34:30 » |
|
I recently stripped a lot of my websites of copyright notices.
I also made “open source” the development language that has led to many of my internet successes.
www.smxlang.org
Why? Because I realized that in some cases, the propagation of the idea is more important than attribution or reward
See the recent post at: http://www.memebot.com
--- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
First, read Bruce Sterling's "Distraction", and then read http://electionmethods.org.
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Initiate     
Gender: 
Posts: 2256 Reputation: 6.00 Rate MoEnzyme

infidel lab animal
|
 |
Re: virus: Meme Replication = copywrite infringement?
« Reply #3 on: 2005-05-19 01:39:51 » |
|
Well, especially if you know the meme and its potentials better than anybody else, and it replicates freely and well, then your own value in exploiting such a situation increases. Your reward and attribution continue despite your claims of altruism.
I personally wouldn't do away with copyright notices . . . I think thats a bad idea. I think that I could simply have a notice that says its free as long as you attribute it properly (don't forget the source). The attribution doesn't even have to require a link, though that would be nice.
-Jake
> [Original Message] > From: Erik Aronesty <erik@zoneedit.com> > To: Church of Virus <virus@lucifer.com> > Date: 05/18/2005 2:34:12 PM > Subject: Re: virus: Meme Replication = copywrite infringement? > > I recently stripped a lot of my websites of copyright notices. > > I also made “open source” the development language that has led to many of my internet successes. > > www.smxlang.org > > Why? Because I realized that in some cases, the propagation of the idea is more important than attribution or reward > > See the recent post at: http://www.memebot.com > > --- > To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
--- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
I will fight your gods for food, Mo Enzyme
 (consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
simul
Adept    
Gender: 
Posts: 614 Reputation: 7.06 Rate simul

I am a lama.

|
 |
Re: virus: Meme Replication = copywrite infringement?
« Reply #4 on: 2005-05-20 22:30:25 » |
|
> Well, especially if you know the > meme and its potentials better > than anybody else, and it > replicates freely and well, then > your own value in exploiting such > a situation increases.
Precisely. For example, I leave my used science magazines in cafes. I encourage others to do so as well. Why? Because I thrive in a rapidly technologically advancing world.
> Your reward and attribution > continue despite your claims of > altruism.
Altruism? When I try to spread love, peace and generosity, I do so entirely out my own selfish motivation to have a nice world to live in.
> I personally wouldn't do away > with copyright notices
For songs, maybe.
But pholosophies? Irc logs?
Things like COV should go GNU sharalike content license. Encourage others to copy freely, no atturibution. The memes are more important than any silly notions of control over them. --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
First, read Bruce Sterling's "Distraction", and then read http://electionmethods.org.
|
|
|
|