Update: I just saw a comment on TC referencing my blog on my Civil War post and this one. TC has a long post (no one reads these long posts) on the Creative Commons problem aka Lane Hartwell problem. It’s a good post about what I’ve been saying on this Civil War in the blogosphere. A Civil War is in the Blogosphere.
What a ClusterF$&k – Creative Commons is broken in the social (viral) media world. I lived through this with Lan Bui when he went after my former company PodTech over a photo dispute – which we paid him. Now Lane Hartwell is making a techpolitical statement going after Richter Scales on what has been one of the cleverest, low cost, and best timed video to hit the tech scene yet. Wait the problem is that they didn’t contact Lane for permission. By the letter of the ‘vague’ copyright clause I guess Richter Scales is wrong, but the low cost video is just that low cost. Half the low cost stuff doesn’t make it and nobody knows about it. Once something goes popular (by pure timeing) then there was a malicious foul.
What made the video great was timing and taking a photos off the web made it great. The Owen Thomas picture wasn’t a make or break photo. In fact I bet to say that if Richter Scales had to get permission from everyone that video would not have seen the light of day. Which is worse no new creative work or rigid copyright language.
Lane is right; Richter Scales is right. Creative Commons is broken. This will get worse as the net becomes more social. As a new generation of producers hit the net we need a new standard.
I’d love to do podcast with Lane and have her tell her side of the story. For now it’s a technopolitical mess.
update: LawGeek says the video was not illegal. Matt Ingram followed this story from the beginning and his original views are supported by LawGeek. Meanwhile Mike Arrinton thinks Lane is wrong on her approach.