MetaFilter posts tagged with ownership

Tragedy of the anti-commons

stbalbach — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 08:27:39 -0800

Tragedy of the anti-commons is the opposite of tragedy of the commons - it's when too many owners create grid-lock, nothing can get accomplished. It exists everywhere from copyright law, tech patents, music industry, airport runway expansion, medicine, etc.. it is pervasive across all aspects of modern capitalist societies. The concept was coined by Professor Michael Heller who published a book in 2008 called The Gridlock Economy: How Too Much Ownership Wrecks Markets, Stops Innovation, and Costs Lives. In an excellent Authors@Google video, Michael Heller explains what it is and how it undermines capitalism, in particular over the past 30 years with increased privatization.

Who owns your ink?

iamkimiam — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:26:03 -0800

Can you copyright a tattoo? Yes, you can. But there's more to it. The idea raises a lot of questions and concerns—for the artists, the inked-skin owners, and certain parties seeking to represent or showcase the work. Shortly after Marisa Kakoulas wrote The Tattoo Copyright Controversy guest article, featured at BMEZINE.com, she encountered a small legal battle of her own. She wrote about it here, and sums up with, "But his story is a good example of how the modified community can fight back against those that violate our rights. I can almost guarantee he won’t mess with us again." Christopher A. Harkins also weighs in, with his paper, "Tattoos and Copyright Infringement: Celebrities, Marketers, and Businesses Beware of the Ink" (PDF). In it, he describes how Matthew Reed (tattoo artist) sued Rasheed Wallace (of the Detroit Pistons), Nike, and Weiden & Kennedy (Nike's ad agency), for violating copyright law, when Rasheed's tattooed arm was repeatedly highlighted in a Nike campaign. "The Reed case—and its nascent theory of a tattoo artist asserting copyrights in tattoos—has a potentially far-reaching impact on any would-be celebrity with a reasonable expectation of fame and on any present-day athlete, actor or actress, as well as advertising agencies and product purveyors and service providers. But the Reed case may also cause alarm for other media industries such as magazines, newspapers, Internet websites, motion pictures, television broadcasting, and the entertainment industry."

Cash rules everything around me

Blazecock Pileon — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 00:29:49 -0800

CASH is the Coalition of Artists & Stake Holders, a project conceived and initiated by musician Kristin Hersh. CASH is "read-write" — more than consumption; a collaborative online effort — helping make music ownership more of an interactive affair facilitated through Creative Commons licensing.

Big FCC rollback vote this Tuesday.

skallas — Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:24:52 -0800

Big FCC rollback vote this Tuesday. I know a lot of mefites are passionate about this issue and it looks like Senators Byron Dorgan (D–ND) and Trent Lott (R-MS) are doing something about it. More info, free faxes, etc at the ACLU. Read S.J. res 17 here.

So the FCC might let me be...

Bixby23 — Wed, 14 May 2003 17:40:53 -0800

So the FCC might let me be... On June 2, FCC commissioners will vote on proposed changes to U.S. media ownership rules. Proponents of eliminating a ban on "cross ownership" argue that mergers between local newspapers and radio and TV stations in large and medium-sized markets will boost the quality and quantity of local news reportage. The nonprofit Consumers Union calls the ban "critical to the independence and diversity of our nation's media". Let the FCC know where you stand (third item on list).

The Inescapable US Drive to Own Stuff

klaatu — Wed, 26 Mar 2003 06:24:54 -0800

The US Consitution really isn't that concerned with Freedom, nor Democracy (doesn't even use the word) - it's all about Property. Owning stuff, owning more stuff, and making sure everybody else leaves your stuff alone. Implications for foreign policy? Anybody? You at the back?

barnsoir — Mon, 01 Jul 2002 15:20:25 -0800

J.K. Galbraith shocked at scale of corporate failures. "I can only say I hadn't expected to see this problem on anything like the magnitude of the last few months – the separation of ownership from management, the monopolisation of control by irresponsible personal money-makers." Myself and chrispy came to the same conclusion on the drive home from the resolutely un- (rather than anti-) corporate Glastonbury Festival today. Profit is valued and rewarded by the vast majority of corporations above all else. As a consquence, people with the same values dominate executive positions, to the exclusion of those with more 'humanitarian' or longer-term outlooks. Where is the balance? Should we make hippie non-exec directors compulsory? Or should I just go back to bed and let the drugs wear off???

tamim — Fri, 03 Nov 2000 20:43:43 -0800

Who owns the rights to your website if you write a book about it?
Michael J. Hammel posed this question today on a mailing list that I am on.