Phenotype is the design, Genotype is code.
Something in the nature of machine/techno-memetics (that is different from bio-natural selection) is that (and proper bio-heads will recoil in horror at the sentence above because it assumes intelligent design)…
… err… (where was I?)… something in the nature of machine/techno-memetics is that there are innumerable code-mediums… rather than just DNA, and successful genotypes will “jump media”. Like characteristics jumping species. Which (as far as I can gather) doesn’t happen.
So segways (daft product, great genotype) gets re-expressed in lots of different media. Rubik’s cubes… Rube Goldberg Machines, guitars, anything to do with star-wars. The pop-art of The Mona Lisa and Union Jacks.
(more)
In fact quite a lot of the “hey neato” effect in the nerdosphere comes from phenotypes jumping media. This blog has literally hundreds, maybe thousands of examples.
The drivers from this (at a lower level than attention-seeking) come from two different directions: 1) vectors (fans) working on behalf of the phenotype and 2) vectors working on behalf of the media… and of these, the latter is stronger I think.
Fans of a technological media are always looking for new expressions for it – and it’s not that they’re looking for new things to invent, so much as they’re looking for existing inventions to copy.
Which is obviously nature flying in the face of “IP” law – there is no such thing as “intellectual property” – it is an artificial, government created monopoly over making copies… but nature itself is a process of copying… from genetics, to language, to the tech spheres – the natural laws that govern innovation are at odds with the law – and when that happens, we see a type of societal cancer. So we need to get rid of the law.
[edit] see… someone’s made a paper one
On Addiction
And The Void Mooned Back...
The Spirit Of The World
A Machine to Steal Souls
More Anti Digital
Thync
Robotic Sensory Loops and Whatnot
Cartestian Robot Roundup.
Post-Scarcity Link-Dump
Servo Bender
Saw this today too. Want to get one to mark the state of the art with an interesting mechanism as that’s a real passion/love.
I’m big on sharing and not-clamping-down-on-ownership giving-it-for-free. I want to encourage people to take my work and use it for what they want to make. But I ‘m not sure how I’d feel if someone took my hard-won work and sold it/profited financially as though it were their own. What’s your stance on someone doing that vis a vis the abolish IP pov?
Well… the happy medium seems to be the Pirate Party’s 10 year, commercial-only monopoly granted to the creator.
But (within the spirit of the law) the protection in this is bottom-up… ie: it is to protect individuals against being exploited by corporations… but I’m not so sure that a good blob of corporate exploitation might not better be regarded as free marketing. MGMT for example, I first heard about in a vacuum cleaner (or was it that Sony thing?) advert. It all raises your profile – and corporate exploitation wouldn’t carry any exclusivity for the corporation (which is what they’d try to demand, now)
And it would be shit if your piece of music was used by the Republican Party – but that tendency is something inherent in the web… the total separation of content and context. I think it’s a matter of “get used to it”… and if this does happen it gives you a leg up in creating a counter-meme.
And besides, if the Republican Party uses your music within the current legal framework, who are you going to call? Ghost Busters? Because the law is totally stacked in favour of whoever can afford the lawyers anyway. The same MGMT song I saw in the vacuum cleaner advert was used by the British (or was it Aus?) right-wing party without permission from the band.
Nah bin the whole lot. Start from zero.
I guess, you’re talking about big picture corporate fuckwhatery. I’m just applying the principle/values to my own personal individual case. I freely share what I know with the world through the web and would even welcome people taking my work and creating their own with it, in what ever way they like. But if someone takes my project off the web and sells it for themselves, and they had the better lawyers? Not sure “start over” or “get used to it” it’s the “new way” would be fitting.
Plagiarists tend to get shredded by the community – more so now than in the broadcast-era. If Led Zep tried this today, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Sdbg2is2zQ they’d be totally taken apart.
Part of this is to do with the web’s love of scandal and misdeed, part to do with the fact that we’re all writers now. We’re all photographers.
But you know – If you’re not already famous, then your biggest problem is obscurity. Someone making money off your back is probably the fastest, easiest and cheapest way of solving this.
eg: “independent distributors” or whatever they’re called… the payola middle-men of the old radio industry, would charge hundreds of thousands to get a record played. Now what have you got? None of that, but the threat of “lost sales”? “a feeling of being wronged”?
At least you’re in the game… and the real risk you face is not someone “ripping off / paying homage”… the real threat is someone sueing you for ripping off them. IP law is not your friend.
I see your point. Yes, it’s far more likely that only a small number of people will see my work. And therefore that there wouldn’t be anything to worry about in terms of getting ripped off. And if someone did take something I made and they found a way to make it go wide and popular then, perhaps they do deserve that success. You’re right, I’ll just keep doing what I’m doing. I keep forgetting I’m not doing it for money.
Well I wouldn’t say they deserve it exactly – if someone else does a better job of making you famous than you’re able to do yourself it will probably be because a) they’re already famous or b) they’re taking the piss.
But that is some moral / emotional problem – and frankly it’s probably not a bad problem to have.
A problem with far more brutal, ugly, house-losing consequences is you being sued by someone else. Do you have E&O insurance? Because if you’ve got a hit then as sure as night follows day, you’re going to get a writ.
So balance the threat of “someone ripping you off” (aka free marketing) with the inevitable law suit coming your way… whether you’re covered by E&O insurance or not.
Or we could just scrap all IP law.
Hadn’t even considered that. Will have to Google E&O insurance to see what it is.
It occurs to me that my blog and the readers who witness the day to day progress, should document the development of my work sufficiently to legally support that I am its originator. But that’s not to say certain people couldn’t try to claim otherwise for the sake of it.
But as you say, that is the least of my concerns. It’s highly unlikely I’d be a financially worthy object to go at.
I’d rather be known for the art by a small group than by a wide audience due to legal troubles.
Errors and Ommisions – which actually means “dealing with IP law”. We have laws that (like accidents or crime) we need to insure ourselves against.
re: proof – well the theory is (and always was) you can post it to yourself… or put send a copy to your lawyer. Not convinced it’s quite as simple as that though.
Thanks, and yes, I’m seeing the date/time stamp on blog publication as a sort of mailed-to-self equivalent. We’re published!