Creative Commons + Google

I'm going to take a wild guess and assume that everyone but me already knows this, because that seems to happen alot lately. But, if I am only the second to last person to know...

There is now a Creative Commons search engine using google or yahoo, that allows you to "Search for Creative Commons audio, images, text, video, and other formats that are free to share online." It even includes options to let you search for items that can be used even for commercial purposes, and find works you can adapt, modify or build upon.

It seems to me that the best way to fight back against Bultegate, the recording industry their allies is for people who power the new mediums of blogging and podcasting to promote and focus on Creative Commons licensed material, almost to the exclusion of commercial material produced under more restrictive licensing.

While I wouldn't put it past the recording industry to sue consumers for not buying their products - even if it is not being 'stolen' they will probably have little success with that one. The reality, which they are well aware of, is that ultimately they have to follow the money. If people turn away from their products entirely, they will have to rethink some of their positions.

In other words, what if public and even commercial broadcasters went to the creative commons for content. What if dentists, the most recent targets of the recording industry started playing only podcasts, podsafe music and creative commons licenced material in their offices, what if the world simply turned it's back on materials produced with restrictive copyrights?

Sorry

My apologies for the google ads, I've tried to make them as subtle as possible (on the main site they are down the left hand side. Scoll down if you don't see them.) I am, in the short term, trying to get the site to pay for itself and, in the longer term, getting ready for bigger and better things for PublicBroadcasting.ca.

Must Read for Bulte

Just a quick web site reccomendation for Sam Bulte

If you build a shiny new house on a landfill it still stinks
Apple says iTunes is "better than free" because it's "fair to the artists and record labels." That's simply not true. First of all, Apple gets 3 times as much money as musicians from each sale. Apple takes a 35% cut from every song and every album sold, a huge amount considering how little they have to do. Record labels receive the other 65% of each sale. Of this, major label artists will end up with only 8 to 14 cents per song, depending on their contract. Many of them will never Artists Get Ripped Off. even see this paltry share because they have to pay for producers and recording costs, both of which can be enormous. Until the musician "recoups" these costs, when you buy an iTunes song, the label gives them nothing

Ok so there are a few changes

It's not a blog per se, more of a letter from the editor that you can respond to, but you can interact with Tony Burman, Editor in Chief of CBC News here and help make CBC news even better than it already is.

My comments were

First let me congratulate you on having the courage to take up this kind of public dialogue. While I think CBC's news coverage is generally very good, this is a good first step in making it even better - as well as more inclusive, and relevant to the issues that are of concern to Canadians or, as you put it, "A Broader Definition of News".

One thing I'd encourage in the CBC newsroom is to keep an eye on the blogs and pod-casts produced by individuals across the country. Spending a few minutes a day reading or listening to these may lead you to stories you would have missed and will let you know what Canadians are thinking and talking about.

Most of these people don't have nearly the access that CBC News does and you can provide more in depth, factual, and complex coverage of issues people are already thinking and talking about. A kind of 'you ask the questions, we'll find the answers' kind of approach.

Further, by covering the things that Canadians are talking about, CBC may help bring about more responsive government. If an anonymous person in New Brunswick writes about something in their blog - it won't get a response from government. However, if they raise valid issues and the CBC covers those issues a response from government is almost assured.

Just a few initial thoughts, that I must keep under 2000 characters. I'm sure you'll hear from me again.

Please send him your thoughts as well.

Many thanks to Tea Makers for bringing this to my attention!

No lasting effects from lock out

Try though they might people seem unable to make culture, Canadian content, public broadcasting or copyright an issue in this campaign. Friends of Canadian Broadcasting has started a "Defend Our Airwaves" campaign.

"If we don't own our airwaves, we don't own our culture. Already, foreign interests can own 47% of Canadian broadcasters. Powerful vested interests in Canada want the right to sell out completely. Please visit FRIENDS' web action centre to send a message to candidates in your riding on this important issue, right now."

As far as I know though, they have received no official response from anyone.

Our Public Airwaves started their "Campaign for a New CBC" well in advance of the election, but it would appear that they have little or no traction with it.

Even with the much talked about CBC lockout this year, the public and certainly the politicians seem to have largely let the issues it raised move off the back burner and into the hidden and rarely examined area behind the stove.

Even one of the supposed 'heroes' of the lockout, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage Sam Bulte, seems to have let the ball drop as soon as the lockout was over and now appears to be racing in the wrong direction.

While this story has received a ton of coverage in the blogosphere, and even a little in the main stream media, it has not had enough of an impact that Bulte feels the need to mention it on her web site.

Regardless of how you feel about Liberal vs. Conservative vs. NDP vs. Green - for trying to sell Canadian Culture to the highest bidder, (if you are in the High Park/Parkdale area) Bulte does not deserve to be re-elected.

It is sad that even after the events of 2005 that no one - neither the general public nor the politicians seem interested in Canadian culture or public broadcasting.

The good news I suppose is that some are extremely interested. Yesterday, in the pbca yahoo group I posted the following outline for the future of PublicBroadcasting.ca

PublicBroadcasting.ca should be a 'public broadcaster' operating solely on the internet, featuring blogs, podcasts and vidcasts - whether hosted on publicbroadcasting.ca itself or remotely.

Beyond that, it should be (in no particular order of importance):

1) Canadian - A place for Canadians with something to say to say it.A site for, by and about Canada and Canadians.

2) Independent - the hope is to set it up as a not-for-profit co-operative, with revenue coming from voluntary donations and perhaps some carefully filtered google ads - no 'sponsors' and no government funding so that the site is not beholden to anyone but it's contributors. Hopefully, eventually, we could pay people something,but it would be geared more to students, retired people and volunteers.

3) Open - Contributors would be their only editors, there would be no censorship with the exception of hate speech and outright and deliberate lies.

4) Real - Canadian life the way it actually is, not the way it's
depicted on television, but true stories and real thoughts without any whitewash, air brushing or editing.

5) Political - An advocate for and promoter of public broadcasting,independent artists and free speech.

6) Inclusive - The site should include people from all regions, of all viewpoints on a wide variety of topics (no political slant of it's own, all viewpoints represented).

7) Democratic - each of the contributors to publicbroadcasting.ca would be a "shareholder" with each having an equal say in how it was run - with the understanding that the basic structure cannot be changed - it cannot become commercial, cannot be bought or sold but must remain an independent voice for all Canadians.

8) Interactive - even those who do not contribute to the site, should have the ability to openly comment on the content and as long as that commentary does not include hate speech, outright and deliberate lies, spam, derogatory language etc. it should not be censored any more than the content itself.

I would urge anyone interested in these issues, or who sees possibilities in this to join us, to comment here, or to email me and give me your thoughts - even if you have no intention of participating, your views are important. It is not going to be a rapid process, nor is it going to be easy but at this stage I feel it's important to insure a last refuge for pure, independent Canadian content.