Comments on: there he goes again http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/ Blog, news, books Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:59:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.2 By: Nick http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13399 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 09:17:03 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13399 My favorite way to discredit Keen is that: he is the self-proclaimed expert on how self-proclaimed experts should not be relied upon. Truly, a parody. Please, everyone, don’t was your time reading him or listening to or watching a video of him at a conference (especially the hour long ones). It will waste your time and make you dumber. And don’t link to him.

]]>
By: Cameron Fredman http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13398 Sun, 23 Mar 2008 23:27:07 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13398 I’m sorry Larry, but I spoke to some unreliable unnamed sources and it turns out you do laud the illegal appropriation of intellectual property, regardless of what you may write, speak, or think about the matter. (I kid.)

]]>
By: Oliver Shulman http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13397 Thu, 13 Mar 2008 14:52:07 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13397 It is my understanding that Lessig only eats poor babies, Swift-ly.
Keen seems a *G*E*T* *A*T*T*E*N*T*I*O*N* (to quote Seth Finkelstein – without permission) cartoon drawn on the back of a British business card and not too.

To imply, in these comments, that Lessig is even considering a libel case is absurd. Where is that coming from? Read the post.

Keen’s arrogant and feeble incompetency is not news.
Watch a couple of the debates between Keen and Weinberger from 2007. Weinberger’s keen restraint is laudable. Keen makes no sense whatsoever, ever.

]]>
By: Steve Baba http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13396 Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:31:28 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13396 Someone above indirectly posted the link to the debate.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=1S6h4IXqcRs

You can draw your own conclusions, but to me it looks like Lessig is using a cheap legal trick springing an unexpected question, he should have brought he notes, right, and Lessig is laughed down when giving his explanation to why not sue.

Since virtually no lawyers publicly advocate breaking laws, and even legal organizations such as the Pirate Party does not advocate illegal piracy, I find it hard to believe that except for people too close to the situation and naive pirates hearing what they want to hear, would read “laud the appropriation” as “laud the illegal appropriation.”

]]>
By: Drue Kataoka http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13395 Thu, 13 Mar 2008 04:17:31 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13395 Thank you Prof. Lessig for braving the new frontiers. Bill Fenwick and I enjoyed talking with you after the panel and we’ve posted our response at ValleyZen.com here:

http://www.valleyzen.com/2008/03/10/everybody-should-run-for-president-at-the-same-time/

This includes a short video of the panel where I captured part of the “Wonderland” quote.

]]>
By: James D. Newman http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13394 Thu, 13 Mar 2008 02:48:48 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13394 I’ve read a lot of Keen — and he is just playing to a particular market. He is speaking to conservatives who are frightened of the sexual content on the internet, to academics whose toupees go crooked at the mention of Wikipedia. He speaks to the same crowd that was afraid of “jungle music” and the erosion of the “Cannon” and the extension of marriage privileges to inter-racial couples and homosexuals.

You will accuse me of being too broad — and certainly evaluated claim by claim I have been too broad — but, pay attention now, Keen is making an EMOTIONAL argument — and he thinks that everyone who opposes him is making the opposite emotional argument. Lessig is making a (perhaps emotionally motivated) intellectual argument — and Keen is probably not capable of recognizing the distinction — or he would categorize it as splitting hairs. (with us or agin us?)

Keen is using the language of marketing — but he isn’t just selling books. The same sloppy thinking goes on at Fox, at NPR, at the State Department.

I believe it is important to slow the conversation down when encountering people painting in such broad strokes, and do exactly what Lessig did — evaluate the claims of fact — and expose the empty advertising claims (with CHLOROPHIL!) for what they are. It makes the point, by demonstration, that there is another way to use language.

]]>
By: David http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13393 Thu, 13 Mar 2008 02:40:00 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13393 @ Steve Baba, its possible that he doesn’t have a clear-cut legal case for libel, but equally possible that he is instead exercising the under-used prerogative not to settle every disagreement between adults in a courthouse. He seems to be enjoying the defeat-in-public-debate model much more and its costing him a good deal less in legal fees.

]]>
By: patrock http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13392 Thu, 13 Mar 2008 02:28:26 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13392 “And if the case were a clear-cut as Lessig claims, Lessig would have a clear-cut libel case”

But isn’t this possibly the reason that anyone is involved in this debate. It all seems as though ones use and interpretation of language differs from another’s use and interpretation of language. Lies of omission, loopholes, interchangeable definition are what legal proceedings are all about.

]]>
By: Wee Willie http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13391 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:11:16 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13391 Keen is lauding, implicitly or otherwise, bad research and faulty reasoning. I haven’t read his book, but I am a great authority and besides, everyone knows Keen is a dick.

]]>
By: Pete Tiarks http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13390 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:10:20 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13390 Brendon – good theory, but I think it’s more that, for all he shouts about it, Keen doesn’t really understand the meaning of the terms “Intellectual Property.” Reading CoA, and listening to that quote, it looks like Keen just thinks it means “idea.”

This amateurish misunderstanding could possibly be cleared up by a discussion with some sort of expert. You know: lawyer, legal scholar, law professor – something like that…

]]>
By: Geof http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13389 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:09:31 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13389 Appropriate: “to take exclusive possession of”. That’s the first definition of appropriate from Webster. Appropriation is exactly what intellectual property laws enable, and scholars often describe it this way. Some critique copyright for permitting or encouraging appropriation from the commons.

The third definition in Webster is “to take or make use of without authority or right”. So Keen’s statement could be taken either way. But from my reading of Lessig, he has consistently upheld the principle of copyright. Given that appropriation is the very thing that copyright does, I find it a little scary is that I appear to be the only one who initially thought of the other interpretation and therefore found the claim confusing.

]]>
By: Brendon J. Wilson http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13388 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 22:11:52 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13388 Has anyone considered that there might be a much simpler explanation? Namely, that neither Keen, nor those that he claims he queried at the conference, know the meaning of the word “laud”. Maybe they’re confusing it with “loathe”?

]]>
By: Steve Baba http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13387 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 22:09:11 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13387 And if the case were a clear-cut as Lessig claims, Lessig would have a clear-cut libel case
against Keen’s deep-pocket publisher. This was one of Keen’s arguments in his book.

But I would take a non-legal guess, that a lawyer not personally involved, would tell Lessig that he does not have a clear-cut case or even a good libel case.

]]>
By: Justin Lincoln http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13386 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:35:59 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13386 I tend to agree with Shannon. I’ve been avidly following your work for years now and certainly side with your views more than Keen’s. However in parts of your presentations…for example the great one at TED…you do bring out examples of mash-ups as laudable media interventions. That type of media does seem to be based on appropriating intellectual property. Those kinds of appropriations are very exciting to me….but perhaps I need help parsing your views on this complex issue. Could you write a bit more explicitly on where you stand concerning the ethical/legal status of mash-ups?

]]>
By: Jason Mittell http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13385 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:31:42 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13385 As I understand it, Keen is arguing that by founding CC, Lessig is lauding the appropriation of intellectual property (key phrase from his blog post: “After all, everybody knows that, as the rabble-rousing founder of Creative Commons, Larry has lauded — implicitly or otherwise — the appropriation of intellectual property.”).

There is of course a key word missing here: Lessig is lauding the authorized appropriation of intellectual property. CC allows people to appropriate their content by granting those rights explicitly.

By extension, I laud the erosion of personal property rights by letting people into my house.

In the unauthorized appropriation of a great American philosopher, what a maroon…

]]>
By: Harry Porterfield http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13384 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:08:47 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13384 Next thing you know he’ll say you suppress free speech and eat babies. All he has to do is talk to people who want to use strong copyright to protect Mickey Mouse, and they will say you want to take away their constitutional right to that IP. Oh, and that eating babies stuff, well… if you are going to lie… lie big.

]]>
By: fredblotnic http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13383 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 20:47:27 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13383 not that i always follow what you say i do believe that keen is inaccurate in anything he states. His cult of the amateur is chock full of mistakes, assumptions, and opinionated rhetoric.

]]>
By: Robert Link http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13382 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:54:15 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13382 Commented at Keen’s site, awaiting moderation. Copied same to my own site, just in case. Quoting in relevant part:

On the one hand, take the case of using a story in the public domain and turning it into the world’s first full length animated feature film. On the other hand take the case of forging a Van Gogh. Both appropriate intellectual property. One does so with perfect legitimacy, the other thereby commits the crime of fraud.

]]>
By: Leona http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13381 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:34:20 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13381 Kudos, Mr. Lessig! It delights me to see anyone debunking that backwards grump and/or his book!

While reading The Cult of the Amateur, I was so infuriated by Keen’s rant about the Internet hurting artists and indies more than the major labels that I was inspired to contact the members of the Scene Aesthetic, a band he alternately calls the Sound Asethetic, to ask how they felt about the way they’d been represented in his polemic. My correspondence with one half of the duo suggests that it is his Mormon mission in Argentina, and not their use of MySpace to build an audience, that is affecting their growth right now.

]]>
By: foto http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13380 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:00:30 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13380 I truly don’t understand Keen outside of SethF’s attention theory too

]]>
By: Steve Baba http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13379 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:04:40 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13379 Let it go. You realize you wasted hours of your time on a semantic argument, but likely reinforce the adage, that even a lawyer who acts as his own lawyer…

I laud the appropriation of intellectual property is not a true-false fact but can mean anything from encouraging the breaking of current copyright lawyers to legally reducing current copyright laws.

And if Lessig was really worried about his image respecting copyright laws, Lessig on his own blog should not link to a Wikipedia page, marked by Wikipedia itself for possible copyright violation that contained the entire text to a Monty Python movie.

]]>
By: Shannon http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13378 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 10:59:56 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13378 Keen is silly, no doubt, but on the face of it I would agree with his statement re: appropriation, although It depends what one means by the term. Perhaps you have a particular legal understanding, but in the art world it includes the sort of audiovisual collages that I’ve seen in your presentations.

]]>
By: joe http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13377 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 10:40:54 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13377 I truly don’t understand Keen outside of SethF’s attention theory.

If anyone’s interested and in the East Bay, Keen will debate Paul Duguid one week from tomorrow at the UC Berkeley School of Information: http://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/about/events/dls20080319

]]>
By: Seth Finkelstein http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13376 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 09:40:41 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13376 For more on the attention-dynamics, see my old column:

Has Britannica co-opted blogging or has it been corrupted by it?

]]>
By: David K http://www.lessig.org/2008/03/there-he-goes-again-1/#comment-13375 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 06:39:51 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2008/03/there_he_goes_again_1.html#comment-13375 I don’t even understand the first commenter’s comment, so consider my comment accordingly. Perhaps Mr. Keen means to say that Mr. Lessig lauds the process by which intellectual property falls out of copyright and into the public domain.

]]>