Author
|
Topic: virus: Meme Replication = copywrite infringement? (Read 1109 times) |
|
deadletter-j
Initiate
Gender: 
Posts: 84
Reputation: 5.01
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: 8.90
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: 7.87
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
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.80
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: 7.87
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.
|
|
|
|
Logged
