|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
| Shore's
Research, Commentary and Consulting Receives Prestigious
Recognition.
[more...] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
Legal Framework: Users, Gatherers,
and Publishers of Content Search for Accountability |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 January 2006 |
|
|
|
|
The year has barely begun and already the battle cries
against publishers and content collectors failing to
pass public tests of integrity and security are swelling up
to deafening levels. At the same time user-generated media
producers are beginning to recognize that they need far
more legal leverage to protect their own rights to
intellectual property. The power of publishing-empowered
citizens is not just a financial force but increasingly a
political force that is compelling publishers to consider
many new forms of legal and technical protection against
legal action and intellectual property theft. The push for
an effective framework for guarding the interests of
individuals and institutions in electronic publishing is
moving towards a far broader debate as to what the
boundaries of personal rights are going to be in a
content-driven global economy. |
|
Welcome to 2006, a year that is
already a scene of tumult before we've had barely time to sweep
up the confetti. Be it governments, database vendors,
webloggers or mainstream publishers there is a sweeping
movement towards accountability in how content is gathered and
published. Webloggers and institutional Web sites are an
important part of this equation, as today's simple and
inexpensive publishing technologies enable individuals and
institutions to defend themselves online in the face of
traditional media outlets that choose their sound bites
carefully, as
noted today by The New York Times. People are more willing
than ever to talk back to the supposed authorities in content
and to question their accuracy and selection of sources.
As Editor & Publisher notes public editors are becoming
vocal inquisitors that expose fundamental weaknesses in the
processes that choose what becomes news in many newspapers.
Database publishers facing vocal public criticism about their
management of personal information are
pushing for U.S. legislation (LA Times) to defend
themselves against potentially tough proposed state laws.
User-publishers are also taking some hard punches lately.
Wikipedia's issues about editorial processes were already
taking shots before
Rogers Cadenhead on Workbench took on Wikipedia pioneer Jimmy
Wales for airbrushing out of his Wikipedia bio other key
founders. And webloggers themselves are fighting
an onslaught of wholesale plagiarism (Om Malik) that is
draining ad revenues from the Web sites of popular content
creators. Add in questions surrounding the U.S. government's
use of data mining techniques used to monitor international
communications (NY Times - premium) and it's hard times for
integrity in content.
Greater openness is good news for audiences who act as
outspoken watchdogs through their own Web publishing. But these
virtues become problematic for those who want to be known for
integrity in publishing. Openness in publishing has created
both an infinite global village of glass houses and an infinite
supply of stones, with little restraint between the two. For
all the popular talk about the virtues of democratic global
publishing there is a lack of ground rules (much less a
Constitution) for this burgeoning Content Nation that is
going to lead to many conflicts and innovative solutions
emerging this year. Here are a few thoughts as to how citizens
of Content Nation can benefit from bringing both safety and
integrity to electronic publishing:
- Content that can prove its integrity in an open
environment is the doorway to premium content. While
subscription dollars and security needs are going to be an
important part of the content quality equation for some time,
the ability of content's integrity to shine forth in the most
open light possible is proving to be the quickest path to
amplifying its value in global content markets. Online user
comments, ratings and rankings are just the initial factors
that are proving out the importance of putting out content
that will stand up to the active dialog provided by online
scrutiny. The next chapter is the ability of content sources
to provide editorial depth and accuracy in very open
contexts. For professional publishers it's likely to lead to
a new appreciation of the fundamentals of journalism - and to
value-add services that can be added on to people eager to
know the story behind the story that's proven its integrity
in wide-open venues. Openness may challenge the integrity of
content sources old and new but if your content can't take
the heat, then it's not likely to build to higher levels of
value.
- Copyright and DRM looks better and better. The
Creative Commons movement and the open source movement have popularized the idea of open licensing of content, but
unwittingly these forces have also popularized the notion that content
can be redistributed and re-used illegally without fear of
reprisals. Now webloggers who rely on their writing skills
for their personal income face the same issues of protecting
intellectual property that the professional publishers
against whom they've ranted have dealt with for many years.
Clearly the emerging ability of user-publishers to benefit
financially from producing publicly available intellectual
property has created an increasingly urgent requirement for
defining an effective legal and enforcement framework to
manage IP rights in a very open publishing environment.
Active engagement is required from all parties in the content
industry to develop new systems of regulating and monitoring
IP rights that will not discourage the phenomenal
interactivity and creativity of the user-generated media that
is creating the core of the industry's future strengths.
- My content, my self. The current concerns about
U.S. wiretapping, the security issues surrounding databases
of personal information and the escalating confrontations
between the Chinese government and increasingly independent
webloggers highlight an increasing awareness that individuals
of all kinds have a greater investment in personal
information and communications than ever before. During the
rise of industrialism the philosopher
Karl Marx postulated that "the workers own the means of
production" and created a framework for collective action
amongst workers that gave rise to new forms of political
consciousness. The political framework of global publishing
is in many ways far more diffuse and fragmented than the
movements spawned by Marx. But there is a growing awareness
that the limits of intellectual property are moving beyond
simple commercial interests and towards an environment in
which IP rights become a more direct expression of individual
rights traditionally associated with real property and
physical privacy. This accelerating debate over the rights of
individuals requires traditional publishers to develop a
deeper appreciation of their role as stewards of change in a
complex and rapidly evolving global culture.
We can expect to see surprising events over the next couple
of years underscoring the emerging awareness that the security
and integrity of content is becoming one of the central
requirements for a successful global economy. Ensuring royalty
payments, ad revenues and licensing fees are certainly
important goals, but if publishers do not pay close attention
to the broader issues surrounding accountability in publishing
then they will find themselves on the wrong end of the
integrity debate at a highly inopportune time.
-
John Blossom
To top of
page
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
