Copywrongnz?

Fan art is common place on the internet, but we’re now entering the age where 3d printing makes it possible to reproduce a model of a copyrighted object.  This link details a take-down notice placed on a downloadable 3d model.

Is this fair?  Does it really threaten the livelihood of the creators of war-hammer?  In this case, I’d say it potentially does.  War hammer models are something that it would be very easy to reproduce on an increasingly cheap 3d printer.  They have no functions, and the official version could become indistinguishable from the printed one if the same materials were used.

So what we have here is one of the first cases of toy piracy.  How businesses and individuals deal with that will be interesting to watch.

Canada is poised to update its copyright bill.  This new law updates fair dealing, which is considered to be material copied for the purpose of research or private study, criticism or review or for the purpose of news reporting.

The future of home-based manufacturing is almost at our doorstep.  3d printing will be the biggest change since the industrial revolution, and designing has the potential to usher in a new era of creativity.  It will be interesting to watch how the intellectual property aspects are guarded.  

What will stop anyone manufacturing their own copyrighted items?  Can we possibly stop printed Nike caps?  It is just an embossed tick after-all, it has no intrinsic value beyond the material.    

I’m really looking forward to finding time to read my kindle copy of Brooklyn Law School professor Jason Mazzone’s book about over-reaching by copyright holders.  

Apparently, disseminating an account of a sports match amounts to a violation.  Shout it from the roof tops, folks.  

With the US Senate about to vote on SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act), Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales is threatening to blackout all of Wiki to protest the action.  Imagine going a day without consulting the online knowledge base?  Hard isn’t it.  

Comedian Louis CK has released a show, the taping of which he funded himself.  He has released it without DRM of any kind, for $5 US.

It’s a smart move, and one that I’m sure will pay off for him (combined with some g33k marketing, such as doing an AMA on Reddit).  Because lets face it, no matter how much DRM was chucked on a DVD or a Blu-Ray, people would pirate it anyway.  In fact, this model is actually far more likely to induce guilt among pirates and cause them to give over the $5.

It’s the personal touch that will push people towards the purchase button.

Andy Baio brings up an interesting point about the digital native generation.  What happens when they start to vote?  What happens when they are elected to office?  I think in ten to twenty years time there will have to be a massive shift in the way we think about copyright and remixing. 

In 2009, the EFF won a landmark case which allowed users to jailbreak iPhones and other devices.  This post argues that jailbreaking actually helps manufacturers, because it encourages innovation and helps bring to light security concerns.  This fight for legality is a very important one to watch, mainly because people are going to do it either way.  

We can either be legally tampering, or illegally tamping with our own possessions. One way makes criminals of users who are simply seeking to make better use of their devices, the other acknowledges that the consumer does in fact own the device they have purchased.