Appended tries to – very succinctly - weave rhetorical concerns below more pragmatically into the text. Take or leave. Lots of ideas for next round in any case. Best sj From: IT Services <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 21:23:44 +0100 To: Sean Cubitt <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: "Warren L." <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: RE: draft Thanks Sean. This looks exciting. Is there any way we might emphasise the Centre's role in honing UK expertise, opening it up and ensuring it's fully tuned to the wealth of business practices on the rise beyond this land? This is a key concern for AHRC, ESRC et al who tend to be painfully retarded "Creative Britain" thinkers. Of course we can't say that, but can stress the importance of business model diversity for socio-economic sustainability, and the ways this Centre might nurture social cohesion by revitalising the ethos of the Commons, in a landscape scarred by alienation, dispossession, non-identification, etc. Sorry for rhetorical overkill but hopefully you get what I mean. It might be useful to allude to Asian energies, which tend to be an obsession... The UK as a crossroads for multicultural dynamics and mores, inspiring its richly diversified communities with exemplary new business models etc. Dunno. LIberate Media - Tim Greenhalgh (Lorraine's contact and usefully Southampton-loyal, Brighton based) - has also been contacted and could be a good relay (information/ PR vector amongst others). Kirk Woolford would readily be part of the Sussex team and has ample soft- and hardware development experience, private sector (US/ Europe) and govt. / research council/ TSB etc. Am in your old Dundee haunt Thur-Fri so shall will the walkers onwards. best sj Sally Jane Norman Professor of Performance Technologies Director, Attenborough Centre for the Creative Arts Silverstone 310 University of Sussex Brighton BN1 9RG United Kingdom www.sussex.ac.uk/acca/ ________________________________ From: Sean Cubitt [[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] Sent: Tuesday, 23 August 2011 12:21 p.m. To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Warren L.; Sally-Jane Norman Subject: draft I sent this yesterday but the listserver bounced saying I had to many recipients: The problem being that we do not yet know the total of those invovled; and we have not got a way to articulate the loose grouping so far at southampton with the P2P communication channels – Franco: when the bounce reaches you, it might be as well to add the people named to the circuation for this list I also copy in the two people who will be working this the net phase (till 2 september) whie I'm on fieldwork: Prof sally Jane Norman and Dr Lorraine Warren I paste the original message and the list f recipients: I sent it at 4.00pm BST; only three comments retrned so far, all supportive ; we have also got a lot of local partners some listed who have now sent support messages, important fpr our tatctical presentation Sean +++++++++++++++++++++ Dear Colleagues The team asked me to to a first draft of the EoI I am delighted to acknowledge the generous help of Prof Sally Jane Norman from Sussex who has come aboard and been a rock I've also taken the liberty of contacting more potential partners. Unfoprtunately everyone else is at the beach - which is why the wild-eyed trot got the job of drafting this Absolutely the first draft. I've left space for additions, and of course we will have to rewrite as a group I may have put in too much detail on personnel; ad we may need it for a more strategic expression in the section on Partnership; colleagues will also I trust have theior own drums to beat as to 'orograms of work' - I think the model may be good; and I hope that we reflect the originality of he proposal By the way Prof Ian Hargreaves has agreed to come and give a talk at Winchester in the autumn term; we are just negotiating dates with lawrence Lessig to arrange a dialogue between them. Unfortunately we are not able to make their dates coincide with Michel bauwens visit here in december, but a ball will be very truly rolling by then Technicalities: I leave to walk the Pilgrim's Way on Thirsday morning and will have little or no e-mail access. Lorraine Warren <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> kindly offered to pick up the baton during my absence - I shoud be available on the 2nd of September I had thought of posting on the P2P wiki or to Google Docs for editing but with so many hands, I'm not sure whether that is the best way: recommendations would be excellent With thanks ] Sean Matthews N.S. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Appleby K.M. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Beales R.M. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Brailsford S.C. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Butler P. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Earl G.P. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Foster S.A. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Harris L.J. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Kling G. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Moreau L. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Parikka J. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Price N. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Reynolds N. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Saxby S.J. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Warren L. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Woolley D. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Nazzini R. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Hannigan B.M. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Reid E.S. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; White W.H. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Sally-Jane Norman <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

We should in the meantime - while I pile on the miles - get Nikki and the RIS office to start filling in governance and partnership and finance . . . ? S On 24/08/2011 12:09, "Warren L." <[email protected]> wrote:

Thanks Sean, and Sally Jane. I like the way this is coming together - we seem to be captruing the essence of Hargreaves, while not being constrained by it, in a way that gives us a distinctive and potentially attractive draft.

I've made some tiny amendments. Both Gerhard and I work specifically on business models in emergemt spaces (in different ways). Maybe we shd shout that out a little more?

L Dr Lorraine Warren Director Postgraduate Programmes Senior Lecturer in Innovation School of Management B2/3011 University of Southampton Highfield campus Southampton SO17 1BJ Tel: + 44 (0) 2380 598972 skype: lwarren1759 http://www.management.soton.ac.uk/people/details.php?Name=LorraineWarren& http://www.doclorraine.com twitter: @doclorraine ________________________________________ From: Sally-Jane Norman [[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 9:30 AM To: Sean Cubitt; Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Warren L. Subject: Re: draft

Appended tries to ­ very succinctly - weave rhetorical concerns below more pragmatically into the text. Take or leave. Lots of ideas for next round in any case.

Best sj

From: IT Services <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 21:23:44 +0100 To: Sean Cubitt <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: "Warren L." <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: RE: draft

Thanks Sean. This looks exciting. Is there any way we might emphasise the Centre's role in honing UK expertise, opening it up and ensuring it's fully tuned to the wealth of business practices on the rise beyond this land? This is a key concern for AHRC, ESRC et al who tend to be painfully retarded "Creative Britain" thinkers. Of course we can't say that, but can stress the importance of business model diversity for socio-economic sustainability, and the ways this Centre might nurture social cohesion by revitalising the ethos of the Commons, in a landscape scarred by alienation, dispossession, non-identification, etc. Sorry for rhetorical overkill but hopefully you get what I mean.

It might be useful to allude to Asian energies, which tend to be an obsession... The UK as a crossroads for multicultural dynamics and mores, inspiring its richly diversified communities with exemplary new business models etc. Dunno.

LIberate Media - Tim Greenhalgh (Lorraine's contact and usefully Southampton-loyal, Brighton based) - has also been contacted and could be a good relay (information/ PR vector amongst others). Kirk Woolford would readily be part of the Sussex team and has ample soft- and hardware development experience, private sector (US/ Europe) and govt. / research council/ TSB etc.

Am in your old Dundee haunt Thur-Fri so shall will the walkers onwards.

best

sj

Sally Jane Norman Professor of Performance Technologies Director, Attenborough Centre for the Creative Arts Silverstone 310 University of Sussex Brighton BN1 9RG United Kingdom www.sussex.ac.uk/acca/ ________________________________ From: Sean Cubitt [[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] Sent: Tuesday, 23 August 2011 12:21 p.m. To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Warren L.; Sally-Jane Norman Subject: draft

I sent this yesterday but the listserver bounced saying I had to many recipients:

The problem being that we do not yet know the total of those invovled; and we have not got a way to articulate the loose grouping so far at southampton with the P2P communication channels ­ Franco: when the bounce reaches you, it might be as well to add the people named to the circuation for this list

I also copy in the two people who will be working this the net phase (till 2 september) whie I'm on fieldwork: Prof sally Jane Norman and Dr Lorraine Warren

I paste the original message and the list f recipients: I sent it at 4.00pm BST; only three comments retrned so far, all supportive ; we have also got a lot of local partners some listed who have now sent support messages, important fpr our tatctical presentation

Sean

+++++++++++++++++++++

Dear Colleagues

The team asked me to to a first draft of the EoI

I am delighted to acknowledge the generous help of Prof Sally Jane Norman from Sussex who has come aboard and been a rock

I've also taken the liberty of contacting more potential partners. Unfoprtunately everyone else is at the beach - which is why the wild-eyed trot got the job of drafting this

Absolutely the first draft. I've left space for additions, and of course we will have to rewrite as a group

I may have put in too much detail on personnel; ad we may need it for a more strategic expression in the section on Partnership; colleagues will also I trust have theior own drums to beat as to 'orograms of work' - I think the model may be good; and I hope that we reflect the originality of he proposal

By the way Prof Ian Hargreaves has agreed to come and give a talk at Winchester in the autumn term; we are just negotiating dates with lawrence Lessig to arrange a dialogue between them. Unfortunately we are not able to make their dates coincide with Michel bauwens visit here in december, but a ball will be very truly rolling by then

Technicalities: I leave to walk the Pilgrim's Way on Thirsday morning and will have little or no e-mail access. Lorraine Warren <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> kindly offered to pick up the baton during my absence - I shoud be available on the 2nd of September

I had thought of posting on the P2P wiki or to Google Docs for editing but with so many hands, I'm not sure whether that is the best way: recommendations would be excellent

With thanks ] Sean

Matthews N.S. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Appleby K.M. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Beales R.M. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Brailsford S.C. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Butler P. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Earl G.P. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Foster S.A. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Harris L.J. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Kling G. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Moreau L. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Parikka J. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Price N. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Reynolds N. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Saxby S.J. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Warren L. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Woolley D. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Nazzini R. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Hannigan B.M. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Reid E.S. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; White W.H. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Sally-Jane Norman <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

Keep on adding the critical mass! S On 24/08/2011 14:44, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:

I think that would be a very good idea now the draft is taking shape - Di, Nik, how shd this be done?

Btw, had a chat with Tim at Lib Media, pretty sure he will be on board

L

Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

-----Original Message----- From: Cubitt S.R. <[email protected]> Sender: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 14:34:26 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in theCreative Economy<[email protected]>; Sally-Jane Norman<[email protected]>; Sean Cubitt<[email protected]> Reply-To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Centre] draft

We should in the meantime - while I pile on the miles - get Nikki and the RIS office to start filling in governance and partnership and finance . . . ?

S

On 24/08/2011 12:09, "Warren L." <[email protected]> wrote:

...

Thanks Sean, and Sally Jane. I like the way this is coming together - we seem to be captruing the essence of Hargreaves, while not being constrained by it, in a way that gives us a distinctive and potentially attractive draft.

I've made some tiny amendments. Both Gerhard and I work specifically on business models in emergemt spaces (in different ways). Maybe we shd shout that out a little more?

L Dr Lorraine Warren Director Postgraduate Programmes Senior Lecturer in Innovation School of Management B2/3011 University of Southampton Highfield campus Southampton SO17 1BJ Tel: + 44 (0) 2380 598972 skype: lwarren1759 http://www.management.soton.ac.uk/people/details.php?Name=LorraineWarren& http://www.doclorraine.com twitter: @doclorraine ________________________________________ From: Sally-Jane Norman [[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 9:30 AM To: Sean Cubitt; Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Warren L. Subject: Re: draft

Appended tries to ­ very succinctly - weave rhetorical concerns below more pragmatically into the text. Take or leave. Lots of ideas for next round in any case.

Best sj

From: IT Services <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 21:23:44 +0100 To: Sean Cubitt <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: "Warren L." <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: RE: draft

Thanks Sean. This looks exciting. Is there any way we might emphasise the Centre's role in honing UK expertise, opening it up and ensuring it's fully tuned to the wealth of business practices on the rise beyond this land? This is a key concern for AHRC, ESRC et al who tend to be painfully retarded "Creative Britain" thinkers. Of course we can't say that, but can stress the importance of business model diversity for socio-economic sustainability, and the ways this Centre might nurture social cohesion by revitalising the ethos of the Commons, in a landscape scarred by alienation, dispossession, non-identification, etc. Sorry for rhetorical overkill but hopefully you get what I mean.

It might be useful to allude to Asian energies, which tend to be an obsession... The UK as a crossroads for multicultural dynamics and mores, inspiring its richly diversified communities with exemplary new business models etc. Dunno.

LIberate Media - Tim Greenhalgh (Lorraine's contact and usefully Southampton-loyal, Brighton based) - has also been contacted and could be a good relay (information/ PR vector amongst others). Kirk Woolford would readily be part of the Sussex team and has ample soft- and hardware development experience, private sector (US/ Europe) and govt. / research council/ TSB etc.

Am in your old Dundee haunt Thur-Fri so shall will the walkers onwards.

best

sj

Sally Jane Norman Professor of Performance Technologies Director, Attenborough Centre for the Creative Arts Silverstone 310 University of Sussex Brighton BN1 9RG United Kingdom www.sussex.ac.uk/acca/ ________________________________ From: Sean Cubitt [[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] Sent: Tuesday, 23 August 2011 12:21 p.m. To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Warren L.; Sally-Jane Norman Subject: draft

I sent this yesterday but the listserver bounced saying I had to many recipients:

The problem being that we do not yet know the total of those invovled; and we have not got a way to articulate the loose grouping so far at southampton with the P2P communication channels ­ Franco: when the bounce reaches you, it might be as well to add the people named to the circuation for this list

I also copy in the two people who will be working this the net phase (till 2 september) whie I'm on fieldwork: Prof sally Jane Norman and Dr Lorraine Warren

I paste the original message and the list f recipients: I sent it at 4.00pm BST; only three comments retrned so far, all supportive ; we have also got a lot of local partners some listed who have now sent support messages, important fpr our tatctical presentation

Sean

+++++++++++++++++++++

Dear Colleagues

The team asked me to to a first draft of the EoI

I am delighted to acknowledge the generous help of Prof Sally Jane Norman from Sussex who has come aboard and been a rock

I've also taken the liberty of contacting more potential partners. Unfoprtunately everyone else is at the beach - which is why the wild-eyed trot got the job of drafting this

Absolutely the first draft. I've left space for additions, and of course we will have to rewrite as a group

I may have put in too much detail on personnel; ad we may need it for a more strategic expression in the section on Partnership; colleagues will also I trust have theior own drums to beat as to 'orograms of work' - I think the model may be good; and I hope that we reflect the originality of he proposal

By the way Prof Ian Hargreaves has agreed to come and give a talk at Winchester in the autumn term; we are just negotiating dates with lawrence Lessig to arrange a dialogue between them. Unfortunately we are not able to make their dates coincide with Michel bauwens visit here in december, but a ball will be very truly rolling by then

Technicalities: I leave to walk the Pilgrim's Way on Thirsday morning and will have little or no e-mail access. Lorraine Warren <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> kindly offered to pick up the baton during my absence - I shoud be available on the 2nd of September

I had thought of posting on the P2P wiki or to Google Docs for editing but with so many hands, I'm not sure whether that is the best way: recommendations would be excellent

With thanks ] Sean

Matthews N.S. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Appleby K.M. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Beales R.M. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Brailsford S.C. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Butler P. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Earl G.P. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Foster S.A. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Harris L.J. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Kling G. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Moreau L. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Parikka J. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Price N. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Reynolds N. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Saxby S.J. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Warren L. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Woolley D. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Nazzini R. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Hannigan B.M. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Reid E.S. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; White W.H. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Sally-Jane Norman <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

_______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:resume

Dear Sean, I have not yet read your draft, as you perhaps recall, I was off on a five-day 'Rethinking property' conference here in bangkok, and am returning to a 300-mail backlog, but I will get to it either tonight or tomorrow morning. but just one quick reaction to sally-jane's asian energies, 2 thinks actually, you may want to refer first of all the the thriving 'fair-use open-content' economy, calculated at one-sixth of U.S. GDP, as proof of pudding that relaxing IP works and creates opportunities (the success of open geospatial info enterpreneurship in the U.S. vs. closed licensing models in europe which create only a fraction of that wealth and innovation creation is a case study) see http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/the-open-content-economy-now-reaches-one-sixth... second, the Shanzai economy, as an illegal version of open source, based on communities of shared enterpreneurial coalitions, is huge in China and a key aspect of its success see http://p2pfoundation.net/Shanzhai Not sure if that is mentioned, but the P2P Foundation's is complementary to the Southampton and the Center through its network of academic researchers that are uniquely active in the field of IP and innovation .. On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Sally-Jane Norman <[email protected]>wrote:

Thanks Sean. This looks exciting. Is there any way we might emphasise the Centre's role in honing UK expertise, opening it up and ensuring it's fully tuned to the wealth of business practices on the rise beyond this land? This is a key concern for AHRC, ESRC et al who tend to be painfully retarded "Creative Britain" thinkers. Of course we can't say that, but can stress the importance of business model diversity for socio-economic sustainability, and the ways this Centre might nurture social cohesion by revitalising the ethos of the Commons, in a landscape scarred by alienation, dispossession, non-identification, etc. Sorry for rhetorical overkill but hopefully you get what I mean.

It might be useful to allude to Asian energies, which tend to be an obsession... The UK as a crossroads for multicultural dynamics and mores, inspiring its richly diversified communities with exemplary new business models etc. Dunno.

LIberate Media - Tim Greenhalgh (Lorraine's contact and usefully Southampton-loyal, Brighton based) - has also been contacted and could be a good relay (information/ PR vector amongst others). Kirk Woolford would readily be part of the Sussex team and has ample soft- and hardware development experience, private sector (US/ Europe) and govt. / research council/ TSB etc.

Am in your old Dundee haunt Thur-Fri so shall will the walkers onwards.

best

sj

Sally Jane Norman Professor of Performance Technologies Director, Attenborough Centre for the Creative Arts Silverstone 310 University of Sussex Brighton BN1 9RG United Kingdom www.sussex.ac.uk/acca/ ------------------------------ *From:* Sean Cubitt [[email protected]] *Sent:* Tuesday, 23 August 2011 12:21 p.m. *To:* Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy *Cc:* Warren L.; Sally-Jane Norman *Subject:* draft

I sent this yesterday but the listserver bounced saying I had to many recipients:

The problem being that we do not yet know the total of those invovled; and we have not got a way to articulate the loose grouping so far at southampton with the P2P communication channels – Franco: when the bounce reaches you, it might be as well to add the people named to the circuation for this list

I also copy in the two people who will be working this the net phase (till 2 september) whie I'm on fieldwork: Prof sally Jane Norman and Dr Lorraine Warren

I paste the original message and the list f recipients: I sent it at 4.00pm BST; only three comments retrned so far, all supportive ; we have also got a lot of local partners some listed who have now sent support messages, important fpr our tatctical presentation

Sean

+++++++++++++++++++++

Dear Colleagues

The team asked me to to a first draft of the EoI

I am delighted to acknowledge the generous help of Prof Sally Jane Norman from Sussex who has come aboard and been a rock

I've also taken the liberty of contacting more potential partners. Unfoprtunately everyone else is at the beach - which is why the wild-eyed trot got the job of drafting this

Absolutely the first draft. I've left space for additions, and of course we will have to rewrite as a group

I may have put in too much detail on personnel; ad we may need it for a more strategic expression in the section on Partnership; colleagues will also I trust have theior own drums to beat as to 'orograms of work' - I think the model may be good; and I hope that we reflect the originality of he proposal

By the way Prof Ian Hargreaves has agreed to come and give a talk at Winchester in the autumn term; we are just negotiating dates with lawrence Lessig to arrange a dialogue between them. Unfortunately we are not able to make their dates coincide with Michel bauwens visit here in december, but a ball will be very truly rolling by then

Technicalities: I leave to walk the Pilgrim's Way on Thirsday morning and will have little or no e-mail access. Lorraine Warren <[email protected]> kindly offered to pick up the baton during my absence - I shoud be available on the 2nd of September

I had thought of posting on the P2P wiki or to Google Docs for editing but with so many hands, I'm not sure whether that is the best way: recommendations would be excellent

With thanks ] Sean

Matthews N.S. <[email protected]>; Appleby K.M. < [email protected]>; Beales R.M. <[email protected]>; Brailsford S.C. <[email protected]>; Butler P. < [email protected]>; Earl G.P. <[email protected]>; Foster S.A. < [email protected]>; Harris L.J. <[email protected]>; Kling G. < [email protected]>; Moreau L. <[email protected]>; Parikka J. < [email protected]>; Price N. <[email protected]>; Reynolds N. < [email protected]>; Saxby S.J. <[email protected]>; Warren L. < [email protected]>; Woolley D. <[email protected]>; Nazzini R. < [email protected]>; Hannigan B.M. <[email protected]>; Reid E.S. <[email protected]>; White W.H. <[email protected]>; Sally-Jane Norman <[email protected]>

_______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:resume

-- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

Dear Franco, perhaps you could add Sophie's and other contributions to the wiki page, so that they are all in one place when Sean returns? Michel On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 5:42 AM, Stalla-Bourdillon S. < [email protected]> wrote:

Dear all These are minor thoughts from an IP lawyer. Kind regards Sophie

Sophie Stalla-Bourdillon Lecturer in IT/IP law University of Southampton, UK [email protected] ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [ [email protected]] On Behalf Of Michel Bauwens [ [email protected]] Sent: 31 August 2011 09:52 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Warren L.; Sean Cubitt Subject: Re: [Centre] draft

Dear Sean,

I have not yet read your draft, as you perhaps recall, I was off on a five-day 'Rethinking property' conference here in bangkok, and am returning to a 300-mail backlog, but I will get to it either tonight or tomorrow morning.

but just one quick reaction to sally-jane's asian energies,

2 thinks actually,

you may want to refer first of all the the thriving 'fair-use open-content' economy, calculated at one-sixth of U.S. GDP, as proof of pudding that relaxing IP works and creates opportunities (the success of open geospatial info enterpreneurship in the U.S. vs. closed licensing models in europe which create only a fraction of that wealth and innovation creation is a case study)

see http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/the-open-content-economy-now-reaches-one-sixth...

second, the Shanzai economy, as an illegal version of open source, based on communities of shared enterpreneurial coalitions, is huge in China and a key aspect of its success

see http://p2pfoundation.net/Shanzhai

Not sure if that is mentioned, but the P2P Foundation's is complementary to the Southampton and the Center through its network of academic researchers that are uniquely active in the field of IP and innovation ..

On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Sally-Jane Norman < [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Thanks Sean. This looks exciting. Is there any way we might emphasise the Centre's role in honing UK expertise, opening it up and ensuring it's fully tuned to the wealth of business practices on the rise beyond this land? This is a key concern for AHRC, ESRC et al who tend to be painfully retarded "Creative Britain" thinkers. Of course we can't say that, but can stress the importance of business model diversity for socio-economic sustainability, and the ways this Centre might nurture social cohesion by revitalising the ethos of the Commons, in a landscape scarred by alienation, dispossession, non-identification, etc. Sorry for rhetorical overkill but hopefully you get what I mean.

It might be useful to allude to Asian energies, which tend to be an obsession... The UK as a crossroads for multicultural dynamics and mores, inspiring its richly diversified communities with exemplary new business models etc. Dunno.

LIberate Media - Tim Greenhalgh (Lorraine's contact and usefully Southampton-loyal, Brighton based) - has also been contacted and could be a good relay (information/ PR vector amongst others). Kirk Woolford would readily be part of the Sussex team and has ample soft- and hardware development experience, private sector (US/ Europe) and govt. / research council/ TSB etc.

Am in your old Dundee haunt Thur-Fri so shall will the walkers onwards.

best

sj

Sally Jane Norman Professor of Performance Technologies Director, Attenborough Centre for the Creative Arts Silverstone 310 University of Sussex Brighton BN1 9RG United Kingdom www.sussex.ac.uk/acca/<http://www.sussex.ac.uk/acca/> ________________________________ From: Sean Cubitt [[email protected]<mailto: [email protected]>] Sent: Tuesday, 23 August 2011 12:21 p.m. To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Warren L.; Sally-Jane Norman Subject: draft

I sent this yesterday but the listserver bounced saying I had to many recipients:

The problem being that we do not yet know the total of those invovled; and we have not got a way to articulate the loose grouping so far at southampton with the P2P communication channels – Franco: when the bounce reaches you, it might be as well to add the people named to the circuation for this list

I also copy in the two people who will be working this the net phase (till 2 september) whie I'm on fieldwork: Prof sally Jane Norman and Dr Lorraine Warren

I paste the original message and the list f recipients: I sent it at 4.00pm BST; only three comments retrned so far, all supportive ; we have also got a lot of local partners some listed who have now sent support messages, important fpr our tatctical presentation

Sean

+++++++++++++++++++++

Dear Colleagues

The team asked me to to a first draft of the EoI

I am delighted to acknowledge the generous help of Prof Sally Jane Norman from Sussex who has come aboard and been a rock

I've also taken the liberty of contacting more potential partners. Unfoprtunately everyone else is at the beach - which is why the wild-eyed trot got the job of drafting this

Absolutely the first draft. I've left space for additions, and of course we will have to rewrite as a group

I may have put in too much detail on personnel; ad we may need it for a more strategic expression in the section on Partnership; colleagues will also I trust have theior own drums to beat as to 'orograms of work' - I think the model may be good; and I hope that we reflect the originality of he proposal

By the way Prof Ian Hargreaves has agreed to come and give a talk at Winchester in the autumn term; we are just negotiating dates with lawrence Lessig to arrange a dialogue between them. Unfortunately we are not able to make their dates coincide with Michel bauwens visit here in december, but a ball will be very truly rolling by then

Technicalities: I leave to walk the Pilgrim's Way on Thirsday morning and will have little or no e-mail access. Lorraine Warren <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> kindly offered to pick up the baton during my absence - I shoud be available on the 2nd of September

I had thought of posting on the P2P wiki or to Google Docs for editing but with so many hands, I'm not sure whether that is the best way: recommendations would be excellent

With thanks ] Sean

Matthews N.S. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Appleby K.M. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Beales R.M. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Brailsford S.C. <[email protected]<mailto: [email protected]>>; Butler P. <[email protected]<mailto: [email protected]>>; Earl G.P. <[email protected]<mailto: [email protected]>>; Foster S.A. <[email protected]<mailto: [email protected]>>; Harris L.J. <[email protected]<mailto: [email protected]>>; Kling G. <[email protected]<mailto: [email protected]>>; Moreau L. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Parikka J. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Price N. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Reynolds N. < [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Saxby S.J. < [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Warren L. < [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Woolley D. < [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Nazzini R. < [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Hannigan B.M. < [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Reid E.S. < [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; White W.H. < [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Sally-Jane Norman < [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

_______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:resume

-- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

_______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:start

-- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

Cheers, thanks Volker, this is looking good. I've some minor amends/ suggestions but was waiting for a cleaner version so we could textually "breathe" so this is welcome - hope it doesn't come as a curse as it (very) slightly boosts word counts... How about Ned Rossiter for Oz? best sj Sally Jane Norman Professor of Performance Technologies Director, Attenborough Centre for the Creative Arts Silverstone 310 University of Sussex Brighton BN1 9RG United Kingdom www.sussex.ac.uk/acca/ ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Volker Grassmuck [[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, 1 September 2011 5:10 p.m. To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft Dear all, this is going well. We have 7 days to go. I’ve accepted all tracked changes, updated word counts and removed explanatory notes, keeping those that need further changes. Please find attached the ‚clean’ version 1.09. I’ll continue with new tracked changes in ver 1.10 in the following mail. Here just some comments on partners. At the Global Congress in Washington, I’ve talked to Bernt Hugenholtz about IvIR partnering with us. He vaguely recalled having been approached by a different consortium, will check and get back asap. I also talked to Paul Keller from COMMUNIA Association. They are still in founding but we may include them under "partners approached”. I could have easily and still can ask the Center for Technology and Society, FGV Law School, Rio de Janeiro and the Research Group on Public Policy for Access to Knowledge at the University of Sao Paulo. I did not yet do it because it seems I’m the only one looking into international partners an I wasn’t sure I have the mandate to approach them. If the other bidders come up with only inner-UK partners, our international ones might be an asset, considering Brazil is both a strong export market for the UK and a strong pirate market. If someone can please give me some feedback on this I can still ask those two for partnering. Alternative Law Forum Bangalore is unlikely, given Lawrence Liang is infamous for not answering emails. The Centre for Internet & Society, Bangalore (Sunil Abraham) might still be doable. The international consultative board under "Centre structure” now mentions all continents. For North America, we only have MIT Press as "partner approached”. I could ask Terry Fisher from Berkman. Who are we talking to in Australia? Best, Volker

Hi. Can you add Clare Taylor, copied in to the email list. She is the Faculty finance manager working on the costings of this bid. [email protected] Regards Nikki Matthews ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Volker Grassmuck [[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 8:00 PM To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft Dear all, some more edits in the version below. I would like to highlight two issues: * Funding: - Since the ￡5 million is an 80% funding, we will have to come up with an additional ￡1.25 million. We have two suggestions: Google, OSI and UoSouthampton. The instructions say: "In order to demonstrate the institutional commitment to the project the lead institution will be expected to provide a level of support for the Centre...” Is such a commitment (personnel, space, equipment) feasible, and if so would it add up to ￡1.25 million? I have not approached Google or OSI. Should I try? Does anyone have good contacts with them? The only personal contact I have is with Vera Franz at OSI. I could contact someone at Google Germany, but that might not work for a project in the UK. - As for sustained funding after the four-year period, the only suggestions we have so far is contract research and FP7/8 calls. I think this should be a top priority for the remaining days. I’m afraid if we don’t come up with something plausible our EoI might be out before they even look at the rest of it. ("There is an expectation that the Centre will leverage significant additional income or support from partners and other sources, both during and after the award period...”) * IPRs vs. copyright. The instructions say: "3. Key aims of the Centre ... It should aim to encompass research into copyright, business models, creative industries and digital technologies,” and emphasizes again that these are the "4 critical aspects.” Since there is no mention of patents, trade marks or IPRs in general, I think we should replace „IPRs” with „copyright” in most if not all places. Also, we don’t say much on the 4th point yet. The instructions mention: "Research the business potential of new digital technologies, such as new forms of high-­‐speed internet connectivity, smart phone technologies or cloud computing systems, and their relationship to copyright” and "Include the use of novel digital technologies and their development in a real world context, to ensure challenges arising from disruptive digital technology are considered and copyright issue consideration can be embedded in underpinning Digital Economy research;” Best, Volker

ps - referenced e-science paper strictly internal/ confidential please as it's a working document at present best sj ________________________________________ From: Sally-Jane Norman Sent: Thursday, 1 September 2011 9:11 p.m. To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Caroline Bassett; Kirk Woolford; Ed Steinmueller Subject: RE: [Centre] draft Hi Volker Appended version features comments transcribed for Caro Bassett (cc'd), and updated profiles for Sussex team minus that for Ed Steinmueller still awaited. For some reason I can't get tracked modifs to feature - apart from tracked comments, these concern Sussex bio data. Let me know if you want me to integrate this some other way. If for Australia Ned's a good bet (we get an Australian/ Chinese double whammie this way as he's a West Australia based Sinophile with prof status at Ningbo), let me know and I'll try to make contact as a fellow antipodean... unless he's in Siberia or somewhere as is his wont... Re sustainable funding, why don't we make a vibrant case for policy work? The Centre should become an international reference given its ambitions, thus capable of conducting unique and possibly major policy consultancy works for national and international bodies. Heck, why not. Brits still have a Demos hang-up. Let's use it. In addition to policy, it should also be able to carry out major advisory works and contribute expertise to bodies building up archival resources with a view to public use (e.g. declared south east partner The Keep - www.eastsussex.gov.uk/leisureandtourism/localandfamilyhistory/esro/thekeep/) Volker your 4th point might usefully be linked with the UK e-science agenda - might say for example that: The proposed consortium's strong links with the UK e-science community, and notably its contributions to ongoing efforts to enhance the UK Research Computing Ecosystem, will be further developed to ensure that copyright implications of distributed and high performance platforms are integral to the Centre's reflection and feature incisively and usefully in its outputs (etc etc etc). (see http://www.allhands.org.uk/) Maybe our Southampton Innovation Centre colleagues also have links to this and/ or similar initiatives worth quoting - I'm tuned via Peter Coveney et al at UCL - http://wikis.nesc.ac.uk/_escienvoy/files/3/31/ResearchcomputingV44.pdf best sj Sally Jane Norman Professor of Performance Technologies Director, Attenborough Centre for the Creative Arts Silverstone 310 University of Sussex Brighton BN1 9RG United Kingdom www.sussex.ac.uk/acca/ ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Volker Grassmuck [[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, 1 September 2011 8:00 p.m. To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft Dear all, some more edits in the version below. I would like to highlight two issues: * Funding: - Since the ￡5 million is an 80% funding, we will have to come up with an additional ￡1.25 million. We have two suggestions: Google, OSI and UoSouthampton. The instructions say: "In order to demonstrate the institutional commitment to the project the lead institution will be expected to provide a level of support for the Centre...” Is such a commitment (personnel, space, equipment) feasible, and if so would it add up to ￡1.25 million? I have not approached Google or OSI. Should I try? Does anyone have good contacts with them? The only personal contact I have is with Vera Franz at OSI. I could contact someone at Google Germany, but that might not work for a project in the UK. - As for sustained funding after the four-year period, the only suggestions we have so far is contract research and FP7/8 calls. I think this should be a top priority for the remaining days. I’m afraid if we don’t come up with something plausible our EoI might be out before they even look at the rest of it. ("There is an expectation that the Centre will leverage significant additional income or support from partners and other sources, both during and after the award period...”) * IPRs vs. copyright. The instructions say: "3. Key aims of the Centre ... It should aim to encompass research into copyright, business models, creative industries and digital technologies,” and emphasizes again that these are the "4 critical aspects.” Since there is no mention of patents, trade marks or IPRs in general, I think we should replace „IPRs” with „copyright” in most if not all places. Also, we don’t say much on the 4th point yet. The instructions mention: "Research the business potential of new digital technologies, such as new forms of high-­‐speed internet connectivity, smart phone technologies or cloud computing systems, and their relationship to copyright” and "Include the use of novel digital technologies and their development in a real world context, to ensure challenges arising from disruptive digital technology are considered and copyright issue consideration can be embedded in underpinning Digital Economy research;” Best, Volker

Ned great! If you are looking for outreaching (ahem) 'code' connections in the UK, how about David Berry (Swansea David Berry, there are two David Berry's) - he's doing lots of stuff on digital humanities, and on code politics? C Caroline Bassett Reader in Media and Film Silverstone 200 University of Sussex Falmer Brighton BN1 9RQ [email protected] ________________________________________ From: Cubitt S.R. [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 9:35 AM To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Ed Steinmueller; Kirk Woolford; Caroline Bassett Subject: Re: [Centre] draft Hi there Back from my walk: 130 amazing miles of country threaded through the crowded south of england. We also collected nearly 3000 pounds for Crohn's disease and colitis research (justgiving.com <http://www.justgiving.com/terrycubitt> if you're feeling generous) Ned: now at U of Western Sydney, we see quite a bit of each other; very happy to invite him in: Ned Rossiter <[email protected]> UoSouthampton has a major research project in next-gen broadband: as usual, 90 per cent funding to hardware, 9 to software; and the last per cent to content . . . But there is a test platform there There are several hundred e-mails waiting: I'll catch up before diving in more sean On 01/09/2011 21:13, "Sally-Jane Norman" <[email protected]> wrote:

ps - referenced e-science paper strictly internal/ confidential please as it's a working document at present

best sj

________________________________________ From: Sally-Jane Norman Sent: Thursday, 1 September 2011 9:11 p.m. To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Caroline Bassett; Kirk Woolford; Ed Steinmueller Subject: RE: [Centre] draft

Hi Volker

Appended version features comments transcribed for Caro Bassett (cc'd), and updated profiles for Sussex team minus that for Ed Steinmueller still awaited. For some reason I can't get tracked modifs to feature - apart from tracked comments, these concern Sussex bio data. Let me know if you want me to integrate this some other way.

If for Australia Ned's a good bet (we get an Australian/ Chinese double whammie this way as he's a West Australia based Sinophile with prof status at Ningbo), let me know and I'll try to make contact as a fellow antipodean... unless he's in Siberia or somewhere as is his wont...

Re sustainable funding, why don't we make a vibrant case for policy work? The Centre should become an international reference given its ambitions, thus capable of conducting unique and possibly major policy consultancy works for national and international bodies. Heck, why not. Brits still have a Demos hang-up. Let's use it.

In addition to policy, it should also be able to carry out major advisory works and contribute expertise to bodies building up archival resources with a view to public use (e.g. declared south east partner The Keep - www.eastsussex.gov.uk/leisureandtourism/localandfamilyhistory/esro/thekeep /)

Volker your 4th point might usefully be linked with the UK e-science agenda - might say for example that: The proposed consortium's strong links with the UK e-science community, and notably its contributions to ongoing efforts to enhance the UK Research Computing Ecosystem, will be further developed to ensure that copyright implications of distributed and high performance platforms are integral to the Centre's reflection and feature incisively and usefully in its outputs (etc etc etc). (see http://www.allhands.org.uk/)

Maybe our Southampton Innovation Centre colleagues also have links to this and/ or similar initiatives worth quoting - I'm tuned via Peter Coveney et al at UCL - http://wikis.nesc.ac.uk/_escienvoy/files/3/31/ResearchcomputingV44.pdf

best

sj

Sally Jane Norman Professor of Performance Technologies Director, Attenborough Centre for the Creative Arts Silverstone 310 University of Sussex Brighton BN1 9RG United Kingdom www.sussex.ac.uk/acca/

________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Volker Grassmuck [[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, 1 September 2011 8:00 p.m. To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft

Dear all,

some more edits in the version below. I would like to highlight two issues:

* Funding: - Since the ￡5 million is an 80% funding, we will have to come up with an additional ￡1.25 million. We have two suggestions: Google, OSI and UoSouthampton. The instructions say: "In order to demonstrate the institutional commitment to the project the lead institution will be expected to provide a level of support for the Centre...” Is such a commitment (personnel, space, equipment) feasible, and if so would it add up to ￡1.25 million? I have not approached Google or OSI. Should I try? Does anyone have good contacts with them? The only personal contact I have is with Vera Franz at OSI. I could contact someone at Google Germany, but that might not work for a project in the UK.

- As for sustained funding after the four-year period, the only suggestions we have so far is contract research and FP7/8 calls.

I think this should be a top priority for the remaining days. I’m afraid if we don’t come up with something plausible our EoI might be out before they even look at the rest of it. ("There is an expectation that the Centre will leverage significant additional income or support from partners and other sources, both during and after the award period...”)

* IPRs vs. copyright. The instructions say: "3. Key aims of the Centre ... It should aim to encompass research into copyright, business models, creative industries and digital technologies,” and emphasizes again that these are the "4 critical aspects.” Since there is no mention of patents, trade marks or IPRs in general, I think we should replace „IPRs” with „copyright” in most if not all places.

Also, we don’t say much on the 4th point yet. The instructions mention:

"Research the business potential of new digital technologies, such as new forms of high-­‐speed internet connectivity, smart phone technologies or cloud computing systems, and their relationship to copyright” and "Include the use of novel digital technologies and their development in a real world context, to ensure challenges arising from disruptive digital technology are considered and copyright issue consideration can be embedded in underpinning Digital Economy research;”

Best, Volker

_______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:start

Dear All, Can we ensure that Clare Taylor (copied in) is added to this email list, and included in all emails as she is working hard to prepare costings for the deadline. With regards Nikki Nicola Matthews Collaboration Manager (Social & Human Sciences, Humanities, Business& law) Research & Innovation Services Building 37, R4107 University of Southampton Highfield Southampton SO17 1BJ Phone: 023 8059 8340 Internal: 28340 web: www.soton.ac.uk/ris/ "This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. If you are not the intended recipient you should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person." -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Cubitt S.R. Sent: 05 September 2011 15:03 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft Volker Re your query abt environmental externalities and transaction costs: there's an excellent paper by your Humboldt colleague Volker beckmann at www.indiana.edu/~workshop/seminars/.../y673_fall_2002_beckmann.pdf On 01/09/2011 20:00, "Volker Grassmuck" <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear all,

some more edits in the version below. I would like to highlight two issues:

* Funding: - Since the ￡5 million is an 80% funding, we will have to come up with an additional ￡1.25 million. We have two suggestions: Google, OSI and UoSouthampton. The instructions say: "In order to demonstrate the institutional commitment to the project the lead institution will be expected to provide a level of support for the Centre...” Is such a commitment (personnel, space, equipment) feasible, and if so would it add up to ￡1.25 million? I have not approached Google or OSI. Should I try? Does anyone have good contacts with them? The only personal contact I have is with Vera Franz at OSI. I could contact someone at Google Germany, but that might not work for a project in the UK.

- As for sustained funding after the four-year period, the only suggestions we have so far is contract research and FP7/8 calls.

I think this should be a top priority for the remaining days. I’m afraid if we don’t come up with something plausible our EoI might be out before they even look at the rest of it. ("There is an expectation that the Centre will leverage significant additional income or support from partners and other sources, both during and after the award period...”)

* IPRs vs. copyright. The instructions say: "3. Key aims of the Centre ... It should aim to encompass research into copyright, business models, creative industries and digital technologies,” and emphasizes again that these are the "4 critical aspects.” Since there is no mention of patents, trade marks or IPRs in general, I think we should replace „IPRs” with „copyright” in most if not all places.

Also, we don’t say much on the 4th point yet. The instructions mention:

"Research the business potential of new digital technologies, such as new forms of high-­‐speed internet connectivity, smart phone technologies or cloud computing systems, and their relationship to copyright” and "Include the use of novel digital technologies and their development in a real world context, to ensure challenges arising from disruptive digital technology are considered and copyright issue consideration can be embedded in underpinning Digital Economy research;”

Best, Volker

_______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:start

I slotted those in – excellent ideas! From: Michel Bauwens <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Reply-To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 09:52:15 +0100 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: "Warren L." <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Sean Cubitt <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [Centre] draft Dear Sean, I have not yet read your draft, as you perhaps recall, I was off on a five-day 'Rethinking property' conference here in bangkok, and am returning to a 300-mail backlog, but I will get to it either tonight or tomorrow morning. but just one quick reaction to sally-jane's asian energies, 2 thinks actually, you may want to refer first of all the the thriving 'fair-use open-content' economy, calculated at one-sixth of U.S. GDP, as proof of pudding that relaxing IP works and creates opportunities (the success of open geospatial info enterpreneurship in the U.S. vs. closed licensing models in europe which create only a fraction of that wealth and innovation creation is a case study) see http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/the-open-content-economy-now-reaches-one-sixth... second, the Shanzai economy, as an illegal version of open source, based on communities of shared enterpreneurial coalitions, is huge in China and a key aspect of its success see http://p2pfoundation.net/Shanzhai Not sure if that is mentioned, but the P2P Foundation's is complementary to the Southampton and the Center through its network of academic researchers that are uniquely active in the field of IP and innovation .. On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Sally-Jane Norman <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Thanks Sean. This looks exciting. Is there any way we might emphasise the Centre's role in honing UK expertise, opening it up and ensuring it's fully tuned to the wealth of business practices on the rise beyond this land? This is a key concern for AHRC, ESRC et al who tend to be painfully retarded "Creative Britain" thinkers. Of course we can't say that, but can stress the importance of business model diversity for socio-economic sustainability, and the ways this Centre might nurture social cohesion by revitalising the ethos of the Commons, in a landscape scarred by alienation, dispossession, non-identification, etc. Sorry for rhetorical overkill but hopefully you get what I mean. It might be useful to allude to Asian energies, which tend to be an obsession... The UK as a crossroads for multicultural dynamics and mores, inspiring its richly diversified communities with exemplary new business models etc. Dunno. LIberate Media - Tim Greenhalgh (Lorraine's contact and usefully Southampton-loyal, Brighton based) - has also been contacted and could be a good relay (information/ PR vector amongst others). Kirk Woolford would readily be part of the Sussex team and has ample soft- and hardware development experience, private sector (US/ Europe) and govt. / research council/ TSB etc. Am in your old Dundee haunt Thur-Fri so shall will the walkers onwards. best sj Sally Jane Norman Professor of Performance Technologies Director, Attenborough Centre for the Creative Arts Silverstone 310 University of Sussex Brighton BN1 9RG United Kingdom www.sussex.ac.uk/acca/<http://www.sussex.ac.uk/acca/> ________________________________ From: Sean Cubitt [[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] Sent: Tuesday, 23 August 2011 12:21 p.m. To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Warren L.; Sally-Jane Norman Subject: draft I sent this yesterday but the listserver bounced saying I had to many recipients: The problem being that we do not yet know the total of those invovled; and we have not got a way to articulate the loose grouping so far at southampton with the P2P communication channels – Franco: when the bounce reaches you, it might be as well to add the people named to the circuation for this list I also copy in the two people who will be working this the net phase (till 2 september) whie I'm on fieldwork: Prof sally Jane Norman and Dr Lorraine Warren I paste the original message and the list f recipients: I sent it at 4.00pm BST; only three comments retrned so far, all supportive ; we have also got a lot of local partners some listed who have now sent support messages, important fpr our tatctical presentation Sean +++++++++++++++++++++ Dear Colleagues The team asked me to to a first draft of the EoI I am delighted to acknowledge the generous help of Prof Sally Jane Norman from Sussex who has come aboard and been a rock I've also taken the liberty of contacting more potential partners. Unfoprtunately everyone else is at the beach - which is why the wild-eyed trot got the job of drafting this Absolutely the first draft. I've left space for additions, and of course we will have to rewrite as a group I may have put in too much detail on personnel; ad we may need it for a more strategic expression in the section on Partnership; colleagues will also I trust have theior own drums to beat as to 'orograms of work' - I think the model may be good; and I hope that we reflect the originality of he proposal By the way Prof Ian Hargreaves has agreed to come and give a talk at Winchester in the autumn term; we are just negotiating dates with lawrence Lessig to arrange a dialogue between them. Unfortunately we are not able to make their dates coincide with Michel bauwens visit here in december, but a ball will be very truly rolling by then Technicalities: I leave to walk the Pilgrim's Way on Thirsday morning and will have little or no e-mail access. Lorraine Warren <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> kindly offered to pick up the baton during my absence - I shoud be available on the 2nd of September I had thought of posting on the P2P wiki or to Google Docs for editing but with so many hands, I'm not sure whether that is the best way: recommendations would be excellent With thanks ] Sean Matthews N.S. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Appleby K.M. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Beales R.M. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Brailsford S.C. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Butler P. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Earl G.P. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Foster S.A. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Harris L.J. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Kling G. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Moreau L. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Parikka J. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Price N. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Reynolds N. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Saxby S.J. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Warren L. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Woolley D. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Nazzini R. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Hannigan B.M. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Reid E.S. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; White W.H. <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Sally-Jane Norman <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> _______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:resume -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

Will send the list under separate title Sean On 24/08/2011 18:43, "Franco Iacomella" <[email protected]> wrote:

El 23/08/11 08:21, Sean Cubitt escribió:

...

I sent this yesterday but the listserver bounced saying I had to many recipients:

The problem being that we do not yet know the total of those invovled; and we have not got a way to articulate the loose grouping so far at southampton with the P2P communication channels ­ Franco: when the bounce reaches you, it might be as well to add the people named to the circuation for this list

Dear Cubitt, find attached a 2nd draft version of the proposal, mainly corrected some typos and P2PF description.

I suggest we use the wiki platform to facilitate the edition of the proposal. See: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:proposal. Volker made a start there, I think we can merge both documents. What do you think?

About communication: would be great if you can provide me the full list of people involved (with their emails) so I can add them all to the mailing list.

Best, Franco.

-- Franco Iacomella

thanks for these really useful comments, but oh the joys of modern life, I can't open the file, my corporate desktop doesn't suppprt the format.... could we use rtf or something basic like that? L Dr Lorraine Warren Director Postgraduate Programmes Senior Lecturer in Innovation School of Management B2/3011 University of Southampton Highfield campus Southampton SO17 1BJ Tel: + 44 (0) 2380 598972 skype: lwarren1759 http://www.management.soton.ac.uk/people/details.php?Name=LorraineWarren& http://www.doclorraine.com twitter: @doclorraine ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Volker Grassmuck [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 4:14 AM To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft Thanks Sean for your first draft and Sally-Jane — Great to meet you again! Even greater if we would be working together in this centre! — and Lorraine and Franco for edits. Franco, you’re right, we have to agree on a mode of editing. From the interaction so far, the wiki doesn’t seem popular, while everybody seems comfortable with editing text files. So I would suggest we go with that. Please turn on „track changes”. Franco, your changes can only be extracted by a time-consuming „compare documents” procedure. Lorraine, in your version nearly all of the text is marked as „newly attributed”. So again I’m not seeing your amendments. It might be an issue of me using OpenOffice. I hope we are not losing edits. So I’ll continue from Sally-Jane’s version with a few edits and remarks inside the text and some more points here: 1. The call is expressly for a Centre for Copyright, not for IPRs in general. I was surprised about the strong emphasis on IPRs in the draft. Do you think it increases our chance that we offer them something more than what they’ve asked for, or decreases them for missing the point? "We believe that intellectual property rights (IPRs) need to be assessed in relation to one another, rather than isolating copyright, when so many creative entrepreneurs and practitioners look instead to patents, trademarks and designs.” — Really? I for one have been embracing rms’s campaign against the term „intellectual property” because I agree from experience that bunching the very different systems does more harm than good. And then: Authors, composers, photographers etc. protect their works with patents, trademarks and designs rather than copyright? I can’t imagine what this refers to. Could you give examples? What seems like an example for the problems of bunching: „Should the rigorous tests of originality in patent law be applied in copyright?” — Are you implying that this is the case and we are asking whether it should be, or is this a suggestion that it should be so? Confusingly, „originality” is used both in patent and copyright law but means something very different: novelty vs personal, intellectual creation. 2. "Demonstration of need." Here you list seven areas of research we’re going to pursue. I think they should go into the next section „key features”. I also think we need to talk about them a bit more, e.g. how does 1. modeling creative practice as business relate to 6. digital labour? For establishing need I think we should talk about a fundamental shift in the industrial basis and the disruptive effects of the digital revolution. The crisis in public funding of art and culture should be mentioned, as well as the millions that the Hargreaves-based copyright reform supposedly will add to the UK economy. The whole field is in flux. We are in a large-scale in situ experiment, inventing the future as we go along. To guide political and economic actors, systematic production of empirical evidence is needed (Hargreaves). Then it’s asking for target sectors. So we should talk about the music, film, games etc. sectors and what we can do for them. As for distinctive features, I would highlight interdisciplinarity. Existing copyright centres are ’naturally’ located inside law schools and lack intensive exchanges with media science, cultural studies, informatics, art, civil society etc. which will be one of our Centre’s strong points. 3. Business: I understand that we are catering to "painfully retarded "Creative Britain” thinkers”. But: "The creative economy is not in large part industrial in structure.” I think this is overdoing catering to the SME trope. Large corporations are in fact responsible for a large part of revenues and jobs in creative industries and most of copyright lobbying. Also, SMEs don’t come up again in the rest of the text. P2P is mentioned only because large companies are using it. And then you mention that start-ups = SMEs are typically bought out by market dominators. If Sally-Jane is right in that this is a key concern we have to work on making it more consistent and compelling. I hope this is useful for moving our discussion forward. Best, Volker

Mad isn't it - at least half of us must be using open office . . . S On 26/08/2011 13:44, "Volker Grassmuck" <[email protected]> wrote:

Oops, here I go on about formats and then I didn¹t notice that OO saved the file in it¹s native format. I tried saving it as rtf, but it didn¹t reopen in OO, so here is a doc. Hope this works.

Best, Volker

El 26/08/11 00:14, Volker Grassmuck escribió:

Thanks Sean for your first draft and Sally-Jane — Great to meet you again! Even greater if we would be working together in this centre! — and Lorraine and Franco for edits.

Let's add more contibutions, deadline is approaching!

Franco, you’re right, we have to agree on a mode of editing. From the interaction so far, the wiki doesn’t seem popular, while everybody seems comfortable with editing text files. So I would suggest we go with that. Please turn on „track changes”.

Ok, let's do it in that way. My worry is that the whole process becomes a mess in somepoint, because without a central source a lot of derivative versions would be produced. However, with the low level of inputs that we are having, that seems not to be a problem :(.

Franco, your changes can only be extracted by a time-consuming „compare documents” procedure.

I attach version 1.05 of the file, in the evil DOC format, with some little additions. Best, -- Franco Iacomella

Excellent...is there a competition to see who can get the most acronyms into a single sentence? :-) -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Earl G.P. Sent: 27 August 2011 08:46 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft Attached some comments from a DE and archaeological perspective. Cheers, Graeme -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Franco Iacomella Sent: 26 August 2011 14:04 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft El 26/08/11 00:14, Volker Grassmuck escribió:

Thanks Sean for your first draft and Sally-Jane - Great to meet you again! Even greater if we would be working together in this centre! - and Lorraine and Franco for edits.

Let's add more contibutions, deadline is approaching!

Franco, you're right, we have to agree on a mode of editing. From the interaction so far, the wiki doesn't seem popular, while everybody seems comfortable with editing text files. So I would suggest we go with that. Please turn on "track changes".

Ok, let's do it in that way. My worry is that the whole process becomes a mess in somepoint, because without a central source a lot of derivative versions would be produced. However, with the low level of inputs that we are having, that seems not to be a problem :(.

Franco, your changes can only be extracted by a time-consuming "compare documents" procedure.

I attach version 1.05 of the file, in the evil DOC format, with some little additions. Best, -- Franco Iacomella

Dear All, I am back from leave today and happy to say I had a wonderful time in sunny France. I have reviewed the latest draft 1.07 attached (last contributed - Lorraine Warren). I will not be adding or advising on the academic content and direction as I am not an academic, but below are some comments and observations from a bid writing and admin viewpoint. 1. On page 4 of the guidance notes (attached) are the Key aims of the centre as specified by AHRC. It is important that we tick all these boxes in the application. From lay person view (mine!) I think that more emphasis could be given (in Demonstration of need and, Key features and strategic fit) to the final 4 bullet points of the Key aims, particularly with regard to how the Centre would influence policy and strategy. The last bullet point is about becoming a focal point for excellence and I think the bid could mention more about how and why this would happen. 2. On page 2 of the guidance notes mention is made of potential links with TSB's ICTomorrow Digital Testbed, the IPO and NESTA. There is no mention of these in the draft, so it might be worth highlighting them. (see point 4 below) 3. In the draft, the third paragraph of the 'Key Features and strategic fit', highlights non-economic, value driven creativity. It may be worth highlighting the continuity and complementarity between this aspect of the Centre and AHRC's Connected Communities. (Though not so much as to duplicate work in that programme) http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/FundingOpportunities/Pages/connectedcommunities.aspx 4. In the Partnership section of the draft, it would probably be worth formatting so that there is more clarity and differentiation between the people and organisations mentioned. It may also be worth emphasising the value of these partnerships, any long term relationships and future partnerships, as on page 6 (section 8) of the guidance notes, partnerships feature strongly in the assessment criteria. 5. The funding and legacy section of the draft: Can I check that Clare Taylor is aware of this bid and that costings are underway. As well as costings, wording and strategy about sustainability will be needed. 6. The Institutional Commitment section of the draft will need to be written (or ghost written) by Phil Nelson. Is this arranged? With regards Nikki Nicola Matthews Collaboration Manager (Social & Human Sciences, Humanities, Business& law) Research & Innovation Services Building 37, R4107 University of Southampton Highfield Southampton SO17 1BJ Phone: 023 8059 8340 Internal: 28340 web: www.soton.ac.uk/ris/ "This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. If you are not the intended recipient you should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person." -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Warren L. Sent: 27 August 2011 12:43 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft OK, my two-pennorth back in the mix, minor amendments L Dr Lorraine Warren Director Postgraduate Programmes Senior Lecturer in Innovation School of Management B2/3011 University of Southampton Highfield campus Southampton SO17 1BJ Tel: + 44 (0) 2380 598972 skype: lwarren1759 http://www.management.soton.ac.uk/people/details.php?Name=LorraineWarren& http://www.doclorraine.com twitter: @doclorraine ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Earl G.P. [[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2011 8:45 AM To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft Attached some comments from a DE and archaeological perspective. Cheers, Graeme -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Franco Iacomella Sent: 26 August 2011 14:04 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft El 26/08/11 00:14, Volker Grassmuck escribió:

Thanks Sean for your first draft and Sally-Jane - Great to meet you again! Even greater if we would be working together in this centre! - and Lorraine and Franco for edits.

Let's add more contibutions, deadline is approaching!

Franco, you're right, we have to agree on a mode of editing. From the interaction so far, the wiki doesn't seem popular, while everybody seems comfortable with editing text files. So I would suggest we go with that. Please turn on "track changes".

Ok, let's do it in that way. My worry is that the whole process becomes a mess in somepoint, because without a central source a lot of derivative versions would be produced. However, with the low level of inputs that we are having, that seems not to be a problem :(.

Franco, your changes can only be extracted by a time-consuming "compare documents" procedure.

I attach version 1.05 of the file, in the evil DOC format, with some little additions. Best, -- Franco Iacomella

Very happy to oblige, but will need the text ghost written as Nikki suggests! Best, Phil. Professor Philip Nelson FREng Pro Vice-Chancellor University of Southampton Highfield Southampton SO17 1BJ England Tel 44 (0)23 8059 2259 Fax 44 (0) 23 8059 5409 Email [email protected] ________________________________________ From: Warren L. Sent: 30 August 2011 18:38 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Brown H.M.; Taylor C.; Smith H.E.; Nelson P.A. Subject: RE: [Centre] draft Nikki thanks for this very helpful overview, just responding to a couple of your process points very quickly - I do believe Clare has been involved in some of the email circulations, but not all as the team has come together - maybe Clare (included in this circulation) could update us as to what she needs at this point, as I am unsure if a start has been made - We do need input from Phil, I am not aware of any formal approach thus far L Dr Lorraine Warren Director Postgraduate Programmes Senior Lecturer in Innovation School of Management B2/3011 University of Southampton Highfield campus Southampton SO17 1BJ Tel: + 44 (0) 2380 598972 skype: lwarren1759 http://www.management.soton.ac.uk/people/details.php?Name=LorraineWarren& http://www.doclorraine.com twitter: @doclorraine ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Matthews N.S. [[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 5:25 PM To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Brown H.M.; Taylor C.; Smith H.E.; Nelson P.A. Subject: Re: [Centre] draft Dear All, I am back from leave today and happy to say I had a wonderful time in sunny France. I have reviewed the latest draft 1.07 attached (last contributed - Lorraine Warren). I will not be adding or advising on the academic content and direction as I am not an academic, but below are some comments and observations from a bid writing and admin viewpoint. 1. On page 4 of the guidance notes (attached) are the Key aims of the centre as specified by AHRC. It is important that we tick all these boxes in the application. From lay person view (mine!) I think that more emphasis could be given (in Demonstration of need and, Key features and strategic fit) to the final 4 bullet points of the Key aims, particularly with regard to how the Centre would influence policy and strategy. The last bullet point is about becoming a focal point for excellence and I think the bid could mention more about how and why this would happen. 2. On page 2 of the guidance notes mention is made of potential links with TSB's ICTomorrow Digital Testbed, the IPO and NESTA. There is no mention of these in the draft, so it might be worth highlighting them. (see point 4 below) 3. In the draft, the third paragraph of the 'Key Features and strategic fit', highlights non-economic, value driven creativity. It may be worth highlighting the continuity and complementarity between this aspect of the Centre and AHRC's Connected Communities. (Though not so much as to duplicate work in that programme) http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/FundingOpportunities/Pages/connectedcommunities.aspx 4. In the Partnership section of the draft, it would probably be worth formatting so that there is more clarity and differentiation between the people and organisations mentioned. It may also be worth emphasising the value of these partnerships, any long term relationships and future partnerships, as on page 6 (section 8) of the guidance notes, partnerships feature strongly in the assessment criteria. 5. The funding and legacy section of the draft: Can I check that Clare Taylor is aware of this bid and that costings are underway. As well as costings, wording and strategy about sustainability will be needed. 6. The Institutional Commitment section of the draft will need to be written (or ghost written) by Phil Nelson. Is this arranged? With regards Nikki Nicola Matthews Collaboration Manager (Social & Human Sciences, Humanities, Business& law) Research & Innovation Services Building 37, R4107 University of Southampton Highfield Southampton SO17 1BJ Phone: 023 8059 8340 Internal: 28340 web: www.soton.ac.uk/ris/ "This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. If you are not the intended recipient you should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person." -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Warren L. Sent: 27 August 2011 12:43 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft OK, my two-pennorth back in the mix, minor amendments L Dr Lorraine Warren Director Postgraduate Programmes Senior Lecturer in Innovation School of Management B2/3011 University of Southampton Highfield campus Southampton SO17 1BJ Tel: + 44 (0) 2380 598972 skype: lwarren1759 http://www.management.soton.ac.uk/people/details.php?Name=LorraineWarren& http://www.doclorraine.com twitter: @doclorraine ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Earl G.P. [[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2011 8:45 AM To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft Attached some comments from a DE and archaeological perspective. Cheers, Graeme -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Franco Iacomella Sent: 26 August 2011 14:04 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft El 26/08/11 00:14, Volker Grassmuck escribió:

Thanks Sean for your first draft and Sally-Jane - Great to meet you again! Even greater if we would be working together in this centre! - and Lorraine and Franco for edits.

Let's add more contibutions, deadline is approaching!

Franco, you're right, we have to agree on a mode of editing. From the interaction so far, the wiki doesn't seem popular, while everybody seems comfortable with editing text files. So I would suggest we go with that. Please turn on "track changes".

Ok, let's do it in that way. My worry is that the whole process becomes a mess in somepoint, because without a central source a lot of derivative versions would be produced. However, with the low level of inputs that we are having, that seems not to be a problem :(.

Franco, your changes can only be extracted by a time-consuming "compare documents" procedure.

I attach version 1.05 of the file, in the evil DOC format, with some little additions. Best, -- Franco Iacomella

Nikki, First I have heard of it but I will touch base with Lorraine and sort out something the only problem is that PFACt is down for the next three days for systems update. Do you know if we have any costs in from Sussex? Clare -----Original Message----- From: Matthews N.S. Sent: 30 August 2011 17:26 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Taylor C.; Brown H.M.; Nelson P.A.; Smith H.E. Subject: RE: [Centre] draft Dear All, I am back from leave today and happy to say I had a wonderful time in sunny France. I have reviewed the latest draft 1.07 attached (last contributed - Lorraine Warren). I will not be adding or advising on the academic content and direction as I am not an academic, but below are some comments and observations from a bid writing and admin viewpoint. 1. On page 4 of the guidance notes (attached) are the Key aims of the centre as specified by AHRC. It is important that we tick all these boxes in the application. From lay person view (mine!) I think that more emphasis could be given (in Demonstration of need and, Key features and strategic fit) to the final 4 bullet points of the Key aims, particularly with regard to how the Centre would influence policy and strategy. The last bullet point is about becoming a focal point for excellence and I think the bid could mention more about how and why this would happen. 2. On page 2 of the guidance notes mention is made of potential links with TSB's ICTomorrow Digital Testbed, the IPO and NESTA. There is no mention of these in the draft, so it might be worth highlighting them. (see point 4 below) 3. In the draft, the third paragraph of the 'Key Features and strategic fit', highlights non-economic, value driven creativity. It may be worth highlighting the continuity and complementarity between this aspect of the Centre and AHRC's Connected Communities. (Though not so much as to duplicate work in that programme) http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/FundingOpportunities/Pages/connectedcommunities.aspx 4. In the Partnership section of the draft, it would probably be worth formatting so that there is more clarity and differentiation between the people and organisations mentioned. It may also be worth emphasising the value of these partnerships, any long term relationships and future partnerships, as on page 6 (section 8) of the guidance notes, partnerships feature strongly in the assessment criteria. 5. The funding and legacy section of the draft: Can I check that Clare Taylor is aware of this bid and that costings are underway. As well as costings, wording and strategy about sustainability will be needed. 6. The Institutional Commitment section of the draft will need to be written (or ghost written) by Phil Nelson. Is this arranged? With regards Nikki Nicola Matthews Collaboration Manager (Social & Human Sciences, Humanities, Business& law) Research & Innovation Services Building 37, R4107 University of Southampton Highfield Southampton SO17 1BJ Phone: 023 8059 8340 Internal: 28340 web: www.soton.ac.uk/ris/ "This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. If you are not the intended recipient you should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person." -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Warren L. Sent: 27 August 2011 12:43 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft OK, my two-pennorth back in the mix, minor amendments L Dr Lorraine Warren Director Postgraduate Programmes Senior Lecturer in Innovation School of Management B2/3011 University of Southampton Highfield campus Southampton SO17 1BJ Tel: + 44 (0) 2380 598972 skype: lwarren1759 http://www.management.soton.ac.uk/people/details.php?Name=LorraineWarren& http://www.doclorraine.com twitter: @doclorraine ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Earl G.P. [[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2011 8:45 AM To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft Attached some comments from a DE and archaeological perspective. Cheers, Graeme -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Franco Iacomella Sent: 26 August 2011 14:04 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft El 26/08/11 00:14, Volker Grassmuck escribió:

Thanks Sean for your first draft and Sally-Jane - Great to meet you again! Even greater if we would be working together in this centre! - and Lorraine and Franco for edits.

Let's add more contibutions, deadline is approaching!

Franco, you're right, we have to agree on a mode of editing. From the interaction so far, the wiki doesn't seem popular, while everybody seems comfortable with editing text files. So I would suggest we go with that. Please turn on "track changes".

Ok, let's do it in that way. My worry is that the whole process becomes a mess in somepoint, because without a central source a lot of derivative versions would be produced. However, with the low level of inputs that we are having, that seems not to be a problem :(.

Franco, your changes can only be extracted by a time-consuming "compare documents" procedure.

I attach version 1.05 of the file, in the evil DOC format, with some little additions. Best, -- Franco Iacomella

Thanks ever so much Nikki for all your support and also well done Sean, Lorraine et al for taking this forward. It's coming together very well. List of partners looks very impressive:) One thing that I think is missing is the legal contribution. I really think we ought to include Law, especially given our strength in IT law here at Southampton. I think Steve Saxby may still be away (although he's on email) but he would be the obvious person to name as a co-I, even if in practice his actual time for the project may be limited. He's such a big name in the area and there are others in the Law School who would definitely be able to contribute in practice. It would just need an extra sentence or two in places (not sure how you are doing word-count-wise). Best wishes Sally Sally Brailsford Associate Dean (Research & Enterprise) Faculty of Business & Law Professor of Management Science School of Management University of Southampton Room 3029, Building 2, Highfield Campus Southampton SO17 1BJ Tel: +44 (0)23 8059 3567 Fax: +44 (0)23 8059 3844 Mobile: 07801 289132 www.management.soton.ac.uk -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Matthews N.S. Sent: 30 August 2011 17:26 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Brown H.M.; Taylor C.; Smith H.E.; Nelson P.A. Subject: Re: [Centre] draft Dear All, I am back from leave today and happy to say I had a wonderful time in sunny France. I have reviewed the latest draft 1.07 attached (last contributed - Lorraine Warren). I will not be adding or advising on the academic content and direction as I am not an academic, but below are some comments and observations from a bid writing and admin viewpoint. 1. On page 4 of the guidance notes (attached) are the Key aims of the centre as specified by AHRC. It is important that we tick all these boxes in the application. From lay person view (mine!) I think that more emphasis could be given (in Demonstration of need and, Key features and strategic fit) to the final 4 bullet points of the Key aims, particularly with regard to how the Centre would influence policy and strategy. The last bullet point is about becoming a focal point for excellence and I think the bid could mention more about how and why this would happen. 2. On page 2 of the guidance notes mention is made of potential links with TSB's ICTomorrow Digital Testbed, the IPO and NESTA. There is no mention of these in the draft, so it might be worth highlighting them. (see point 4 below) 3. In the draft, the third paragraph of the 'Key Features and strategic fit', highlights non-economic, value driven creativity. It may be worth highlighting the continuity and complementarity between this aspect of the Centre and AHRC's Connected Communities. (Though not so much as to duplicate work in that programme) http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/FundingOpportunities/Pages/connectedcommunities.aspx 4. In the Partnership section of the draft, it would probably be worth formatting so that there is more clarity and differentiation between the people and organisations mentioned. It may also be worth emphasising the value of these partnerships, any long term relationships and future partnerships, as on page 6 (section 8) of the guidance notes, partnerships feature strongly in the assessment criteria. 5. The funding and legacy section of the draft: Can I check that Clare Taylor is aware of this bid and that costings are underway. As well as costings, wording and strategy about sustainability will be needed. 6. The Institutional Commitment section of the draft will need to be written (or ghost written) by Phil Nelson. Is this arranged? With regards Nikki Nicola Matthews Collaboration Manager (Social & Human Sciences, Humanities, Business& law) Research & Innovation Services Building 37, R4107 University of Southampton Highfield Southampton SO17 1BJ Phone: 023 8059 8340 Internal: 28340 web: www.soton.ac.uk/ris/ "This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. If you are not the intended recipient you should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person." -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Warren L. Sent: 27 August 2011 12:43 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft OK, my two-pennorth back in the mix, minor amendments L Dr Lorraine Warren Director Postgraduate Programmes Senior Lecturer in Innovation School of Management B2/3011 University of Southampton Highfield campus Southampton SO17 1BJ Tel: + 44 (0) 2380 598972 skype: lwarren1759 http://www.management.soton.ac.uk/people/details.php?Name=LorraineWarren& http://www.doclorraine.com twitter: @doclorraine ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Earl G.P. [[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2011 8:45 AM To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft Attached some comments from a DE and archaeological perspective. Cheers, Graeme -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Franco Iacomella Sent: 26 August 2011 14:04 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft El 26/08/11 00:14, Volker Grassmuck escribió:

Thanks Sean for your first draft and Sally-Jane - Great to meet you again! Even greater if we would be working together in this centre! - and Lorraine and Franco for edits.

Let's add more contibutions, deadline is approaching!

Franco, you're right, we have to agree on a mode of editing. From the interaction so far, the wiki doesn't seem popular, while everybody seems comfortable with editing text files. So I would suggest we go with that. Please turn on "track changes".

Ok, let's do it in that way. My worry is that the whole process becomes a mess in somepoint, because without a central source a lot of derivative versions would be produced. However, with the low level of inputs that we are having, that seems not to be a problem :(.

Franco, your changes can only be extracted by a time-consuming "compare documents" procedure.

I attach version 1.05 of the file, in the evil DOC format, with some little additions. Best, -- Franco Iacomella

Dear All, Please find attached a template that can be used for the letters of support from partner organisations. Jeremry, Sean, Lorraine, does this look ok to you? It's based on a previous AHRC EOI support letter. With Regards Nikki ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Cubitt S.R. [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 4:13 PM To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft Sorry I wasn't round earlier to respond tp this excellent set of coments - I have one document which must be completed today; after that I'll read the latest draft of the proposal, which I imagine already responds to these great critiques sean On 26/08/2011 04:14, "Volker Grassmuck" <[email protected]> wrote:

Thanks Sean for your first draft and Sally-Jane — Great to meet you again! Even greater if we would be working together in this centre! — and Lorraine and Franco for edits.

Franco, you’re right, we have to agree on a mode of editing. From the interaction so far, the wiki doesn’t seem popular, while everybody seems comfortable with editing text files. So I would suggest we go with that. Please turn on „track changes”. Franco, your changes can only be extracted by a time-consuming „compare documents” procedure. Lorraine, in your version nearly all of the text is marked as „newly attributed”. So again I’m not seeing your amendments. It might be an issue of me using OpenOffice. I hope we are not losing edits.

So I’ll continue from Sally-Jane’s version with a few edits and remarks inside the text and some more points here:

1. The call is expressly for a Centre for Copyright, not for IPRs in general. I was surprised about the strong emphasis on IPRs in the draft. Do you think it increases our chance that we offer them something more than what they’ve asked for, or decreases them for missing the point?

"We believe that intellectual property rights (IPRs) need to be assessed in relation to one another, rather than isolating copyright, when so many creative entrepreneurs and practitioners look instead to patents, trademarks and designs.” — Really? I for one have been embracing rms’s campaign against the term „intellectual property” because I agree from experience that bunching the very different systems does more harm than good. And then: Authors, composers, photographers etc. protect their works with patents, trademarks and designs rather than copyright? I can’t imagine what this refers to. Could you give examples?

What seems like an example for the problems of bunching: „Should the rigorous tests of originality in patent law be applied in copyright?” — Are you implying that this is the case and we are asking whether it should be, or is this a suggestion that it should be so? Confusingly, „originality” is used both in patent and copyright law but means something very different: novelty vs personal, intellectual creation.

2. "Demonstration of need." Here you list seven areas of research we’re going to pursue. I think they should go into the next section „key features”. I also think we need to talk about them a bit more, e.g. how does 1. modeling creative practice as business relate to 6. digital labour? For establishing need I think we should talk about a fundamental shift in the industrial basis and the disruptive effects of the digital revolution. The crisis in public funding of art and culture should be mentioned, as well as the millions that the Hargreaves-based copyright reform supposedly will add to the UK economy. The whole field is in flux. We are in a large-scale in situ experiment, inventing the future as we go along. To guide political and economic actors, systematic production of empirical evidence is needed (Hargreaves).

Then it’s asking for target sectors. So we should talk about the music, film, games etc. sectors and what we can do for them. As for distinctive features, I would highlight interdisciplinarity. Existing copyright centres are ’naturally’ located inside law schools and lack intensive exchanges with media science, cultural studies, informatics, art, civil society etc. which will be one of our Centre’s strong points.

3. Business: I understand that we are catering to "painfully retarded "Creative Britain” thinkers”. But: "The creative economy is not in large part industrial in structure.” I think this is overdoing catering to the SME trope. Large corporations are in fact responsible for a large part of revenues and jobs in creative industries and most of copyright lobbying. Also, SMEs don’t come up again in the rest of the text. P2P is mentioned only because large companies are using it. And then you mention that start-ups = SMEs are typically bought out by market dominators. If Sally-Jane is right in that this is a key concern we have to work on making it more consistent and compelling.

I hope this is useful for moving our discussion forward.

Best, Volker

_______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:start

I've just returned on deck as it were - the weekend went catching uyp with other commitments

Claire, our finance officer, asks "Do you have any figures re the contribution that P2P are going to be making to this proposal?" -- clarifying that this is in-kind, such as the infrastructure Franco has been provising for international partnerships; and possible time given by stakeholders in P2P Foundation. The same question could be asked of others, eg can they allocate say half a day a week from one person (in UK higher ed parlance one day is 20%, half a day is 10%, and we can go to 5% - for example a month of work during the whole period for a specific project or conference) I will be including the following phrase: "Dr Graeme Earl is chair of the Digital Economy University Strategic Research Group. The DE USRG will articulate connections between the Centre and the wider digital economy expertise and digital industrial contacts of the University of Southampton." -- e-mail address: Earl G.P. <[email protected]> Volker asked on Thursday 11/08 "I have not approached Google or OSI. Should I try? Does anyone have good contacts with them? The only personal contact I have is with Vera Franz at OSI. I could contact someone at Google Germany, but that might not work for a project in the UK." It would be fantastic if you could approach them - in the case of Google germany perhaps to ask for a contact in Google UK? I am (after a struggle with the printer) now about to read everyone's comments and changes; and will ensure as many more get in as possible. Claire is refining the financials, hoping to secure the whole 20% from Southampton; Sussex financials will also be ready for the submission deadline On broadband I can secure participation of IBES Institute for a Broadband Enabled Society in Australia; and we have a major materials science / computer science project here o next gen broadband. What we should probably add is the mobile internet and internet of things -- does anyone have good contacts with any mobile providers or say Sony Ericson, who have been very interested in Internet Protocal TV; or do any of us have links with Skype?? All the best Sean PS metamute are on board S

thanks Sean, I will discuss this with Franco, Michel On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Cubitt S.R. <[email protected]> wrote:

...

I've just returned on deck as it were - the weekend went catching uyp with other commitments

Claire, our finance officer, asks "Do you have any figures re the contribution that P2P are going to be making to this proposal?" -- clarifying that this is in-kind, such as the infrastructure Franco has been provising for international partnerships; and possible time given by stakeholders in P2P Foundation. The same question could be asked of others, eg can they allocate say half a day a week from one person (in UK higher ed parlance one day is 20%, half a day is 10%, and we can go to 5% - for example a month of work during the whole period for a specific project or conference)

I will be including the following phrase: "Dr Graeme Earl is chair of the Digital Economy University Strategic Research Group. The DE USRG will articulate connections between the Centre and the wider digital economy expertise and digital industrial contacts of the University of Southampton." -- e-mail address: Earl G.P. <[email protected]>

Volker asked on Thursday 11/08 "I have not approached Google or OSI. Should I try? Does anyone have good contacts with them? The only personal contact I have is with Vera Franz at OSI. I could contact someone at Google Germany, but that might not work for a project in the UK." It would be fantastic if you could approach them - in the case of Google germany perhaps to ask for a contact in Google UK?

I am (after a struggle with the printer) now about to read everyone's comments and changes; and will ensure as many more get in as possible. Claire is refining the financials, hoping to secure the whole 20% from Southampton; Sussex financials will also be ready for the submission deadline

On broadband I can secure participation of IBES Institute for a Broadband Enabled Society in Australia; and we have a major materials science / computer science project here o next gen broadband. What we should probably add is the mobile internet and internet of things -- does anyone have good contacts with any mobile providers or say Sony Ericson, who have been very interested in Internet Protocal TV; or do any of us have links with Skype??

All the best

Sean

PS metamute are on board

S

_______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:start

-- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

No worries Volker - we have some words free to indicate who we *will* be approaching over the life of the Centre, I've redrafted the first two sections - will carry on after shopping - soemthing of a mission here as it involves a four mile bike ride Best sean -- Sean Cubitt Professor of Global Media and Communication Research Centre in Global Art and Culture Winchester School of Art Park Ave Winchester SO23 8DL, United Kingdom E: [email protected] Web: http://wsa.soton.ac.uk/ Skype: seancubitt Work Phone: +44 (0)23 8059 6900 Editor-in-Chief Leonardo Book Series http://leonardo.info <http://leonardo.info/> On 05/09/2011 15:22, "Volker Grassmuck" <[email protected]> wrote:

Am 05.09.2011 um 14:29 schrieb Cubitt S.R.:

...

Volker asked on Thursday 11/08 "I have not approached Google or OSI. Should I try? Does anyone have good contacts with them? The only personal contact I have is with Vera Franz at OSI. I could contact someone at Google Germany, but that might not work for a project in the UK." It would be fantastic if you could approach them - in the case of Google germany perhaps to ask for a contact in Google UK?

Dear Sean,

I¹ve e-mailed Vera. Her out-of-office reply says that she¹ll be back on 12 September. As for Google, I will only be back in Berlin on Wednesday night. Contact would require phone call with the possibility of follow-up meeting. Given the short time left it¹s not feasible. I¹m sorry, I should have acted on these ideas when they had come up originally.

I¹ve sent the template for the letter or support to Communia. No response yet from IvIR.

Best, Volker _______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:start

Thanks Ed, very much I'll use your notes also to respond to comments by Max in a similar vein Hope to have a draft later today for further comment sean On 06/09/2011 07:39, "Sally-Jane Norman" <[email protected]> wrote:

Sean, all

General comment below forwarded by Ed Steinmueller as contribution to ongoing revisions.

In the text, the participant paragraph for Sussex, re Ed, should read Prof. Ed Steinmueller of SPRU (Science and Technology Policy Research), an economist with experience in cultural and technology policy (attached brief bio with selected publications appended indicates relevant expertise).

Ed has annotated the appended version of the document sent last week, annotations in blue . These reflections essentially contribute towards the broader thrust funders will expect from the SINGLE copyright centre they'll select, thereby strengthening as Ed suggests the proposal's original components. Annotations also query jargon - mine included - so provide a useful pair of fresh eyes on this.

Apologies for this contribution being late in proceedings but Ed's points strike me as pretty crucial; we're only likely to break any ground on this subject with RCUK as a credible one-stop-shop (oh the irony!) for copyright expertise if we're seen as a bridge, rather than an island.

Best wishes

Sally Jane

Short Comment on Proposal for Copyright Centre ­ Ed Steinmueller

Given that there will only be one such Centre funded it is important not to be too specialized. The wording of the current proposal (I an no doubt several versions behind) suggests that we are proposing the Œalternative centre on copyright¹ which is immediately a losing proposition given the nature of the contest. A bit more credence should be provided to the conventional logic of copyright:

1. It provides incentives for publishers to identify and promote new talent and to engage in the promotion of works of creative content.

2. It does raise the prospect of market power, particularly in areas which are subject to Œnetwork externalities¹ such as software where alternative competitive products may find it difficult to compete due to the spillovers in skills (e.g. user familiarity with a particular software application) and data exchange (exchanged documents need to be revisable by others). In other areas, however, it is generally expected that competitive alternatives will constrain market power while profit seeking will provide incentives for innovation.

3. Individuals engaged in creative industries on a professional basis will ultimately depend upon some restraints on the copying of their work although it is true that the collapse of some forms of protection (e.g. through peer to peer sharing of music) leads to other forms of protection (e.g. gate charges to live performance). Some creative professionals do not have a Œperformance option.¹

With a little more balance, the innovative and original components of the proposal will be better highlighted.

Given our modest depth in law, I would not propose to undertake the rewriting of copyright law. I think it is a very good idea to propose alternative assessments of the social, cultural, and economic consequences of alternative institutional arrangements for building the business models of the creative industries.

Sorry about that. OSI here is Open Society Initiative (Soros). /v Am 06.09.2011 um 16:28 schrieb Cubitt S.R.:

Help! I'm suddenly swimming in acronyms but now I can't decide if Vera Frantz is involved in the Open Society Initiative (Soros); the Open Standards Inittiative, or the inernational organisation for stantardisation . . .

S

On 05/09/2011 15:22, "Volker Grassmuck" <[email protected]> wrote:

...

Am 05.09.2011 um 14:29 schrieb Cubitt S.R.:

...

Volker asked on Thursday 11/08 "I have not approached Google or OSI. Should I try? Does anyone have good contacts with them? The only personal contact I have is with Vera Franz at OSI. I could contact someone at Google Germany, but that might not work for a project in the UK." It would be fantastic if you could approach them - in the case of Google germany perhaps to ask for a contact in Google UK?

Dear Sean,

I¹ve e-mailed Vera. Her out-of-office reply says that she¹ll be back on 12 September. As for Google, I will only be back in Berlin on Wednesday night. Contact would require phone call with the possibility of follow-up meeting. Given the short time left it¹s not feasible. I¹m sorry, I should have acted on these ideas when they had come up originally.

I¹ve sent the template for the letter or support to Communia. No response yet from IvIR.

Best, Volker _______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:start

_______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:start

—— http://www.vgrass.de/ http://waste.informatik.hu-berlin.de/Grassmuck/

Dear Sean: Thanks for the newest version of the proposal. I think it is fit for purpose with one exception. The section on externalities has become a victim of 'committee write' (compromises) and I would make the following (word neutral -- 48 words in each case) suggestion for revision. As received: The Centre will extend analysis to externalities in the digital economy: 5. externalities: The costs of environmental factors as well as the transaction costs of policing copyright are only partly hidden in the prices paid by consumers. This programme will relate copyright transactions to externalities, public goods and resources. Proposed substitute: Assessment of externalities will be an important theme for the Centre: 5. Externalities: Copyright and other IPRs impose externalities (benefits and costs outside of the choice framework of the market) that influence consumer welfare, environmental quality and sustainability. Assessing these externalities will be a research issue for the Centre. If the phrase '(benefits and costs outside of the choice framework of the market)' seems cumbersome, an alternative is '(windfall benefits and involuntarily imposed costs)' which adds a bit of colour and still is technically correct. Best regards, Ed Steinmueller ________________________________________ From: Cubitt S.R. [[email protected]] Sent: 06 September 2011 17:44 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Matthews N.S.; Amelia Wakeford; Taylor C.; Ed Steinmueller; Caroline Bassett; Kirk Woolford Subject: Centre:new draft Here's the new version, incorporating everything I could from wiki and mails and comments; and removing all previous comments and track changes - you may have to turn track changes back on to make your comments. The word counts require very sharp writing: not too much detail, not too much abstraction. I welcome all suggestions, but we must get this signed on Thursday morning to be sent in officially. The paragraph on "strategy for how to bring stakeholders in to the research process" at the end of the Partnership section is of special interest: it is an amalgam of a conversation I once had with the late Bill Mitchell on how MIT Media Lab was funded mixed in with an outsider view of how Ubuntu make a living from Linux. This I would especially thank you for help with. The section on strategic fit is one hundred words over, mainly because when I'd accommodated all suggestions, I realised we hadn't done the required bit on pubic communications. I will cut to size after I get your reactions The most heavily worked section as you'd expect is the first, Demonstration of Need. I have tried to be more diplomatic, without sacrificing the vision, and in a very tight word-budget. We have about 15 words to play with here In Funding and Legacy, we are near complete figures. These will have to be digested into the 500 word limit. In the meantime I have included the draft of the required paragraph on 'potential for a sustainable legacy' Your comments here also appreciated Thanks so much for the process so far: even if we don't nail this one, it is a great, collegial process. Sean PS Franco: if not on already, could you add the names in the cc list to the Group mail? Grazie tanto.

Dear all, some more small edits in the attached version. And an idea that I had brought up a while ago: I have the feeling that the 7 programmatic points do not belong under "Demonstration of need” but rather under "Key features”, while a paragraph like "We will undertake case studies ... in various sectors...” addresses issues asked for under "Demonstration of need”. For filling in the distinctiveness of our Centre that is asked for there, I would like to emphasize Ed/Sally Jane’s point: "the broader thrust funders will expect from the SINGLE copyright centre they'll select, ... a credible one-stop-shop for copyright expertise if we're seen as a bridge, rather than an island." Success for the final round of drafting. Best, Volker Am 06.09.2011 um 20:16 schrieb Kling G.:

Dear all,

Please find attached a modified version. I changed the third aim (value creation) and added the fact that we know nothing about shareholder value creation in the creative industry. So it would be essential to improve our theoretical understanding. If we (and investors) don't understand how firms create value, they will be reluctant to provide equity or debt finance. In particular, SMEs struggle to get access to finance. Of course, considering a broader definition of value is essential too.

Best wishes,

Gerhard

Dr Gerhard Kling Senior Lecturer in Finance School of Management University of Southampton Highfield Southampton SO17 1BJ United Kingdom

Phone: 023-8059-5427 ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Cubitt S.R. [[email protected]] Sent: 06 September 2011 17:44 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Taylor C.; Ed Steinmueller; Caroline Bassett; Kirk Woolford; Amelia Wakeford Subject: [Centre] Centre:new draft

Here's the new version, incorporating everything I could from wiki and mails and comments; and removing all previous comments and track changes - you may have to turn track changes back on to make your comments.

The word counts require very sharp writing: not too much detail, not too much abstraction.

I welcome all suggestions, but we must get this signed on Thursday morning to be sent in officially.

The paragraph on "strategy for how to bring stakeholders in to the research process" at the end of the Partnership section is of special interest: it is an amalgam of a conversation I once had with the late Bill Mitchell on how MIT Media Lab was funded mixed in with an outsider view of how Ubuntu make a living from Linux. This I would especially thank you for help with.

The section on strategic fit is one hundred words over, mainly because when I'd accommodated all suggestions, I realised we hadn't done the required bit on pubic communications. I will cut to size after I get your reactions

The most heavily worked section as you'd expect is the first, Demonstration of Need. I have tried to be more diplomatic, without sacrificing the vision, and in a very tight word-budget. We have about 15 words to play with here

In Funding and Legacy, we are near complete figures. These will have to be digested into the 500 word limit. In the meantime I have included the draft of the required paragraph on 'potential for a sustainable legacy' Your comments here also appreciated

Thanks so much for the process so far: even if we don't nail this one, it is a great, collegial process.

Sean

PS Franco: if not on already, could you add the names in the cc list to the Group mail? Grazie tanto.

<11-09-06_southampton copyright drafts-v3.0sc.doc>_______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:start

—— http://www.vgrass.de/ http://waste.informatik.hu-berlin.de/Grassmuck/

(I just sent this with a dozen extra recipients which the mailserver doesn't like - here it is again to the group

Colleagues

Thanks for all your input and patience: we have near-final draft here (I will be away form my mail for the ext couple of hours but will return later in our evening Final costings will be coming in a little later. There is some room in this section for more ruminations on securing a future for the centre; and now a little more room for further ideas on partnership. Regards sean

Thanks Franco - accepted all changes: just need to check wordcounts and update financials All attachents received: hurrah S On 07/09/2011 18:52, "Franco Iacomella" <[email protected]> wrote:

El 07/09/11 13:16, Cubitt S.R. escribió:

...

Thanks for all your input and patience: we have near-final draft here (I will be away form my mail for the ext couple of hours but will return later in our evening

Hi, I attach a new version with some corrections, improved format and added missing information. Hope it arrives on time.

Best,

-- Franco Iacomella

Excellent! Thans nikki You could perhaps in the 'expertise' section list a few of the kinds of things they might add -- knowledge about new business models / challenges of digital media / legal expertise / international comparisons / interst in specific areas mentioned in the bod such as digital labour, peer-to-peer, business modles, assessing value, / adding specific cases to be studies such as new publishing models, games, music, design, arcives / academic and research specialisms including methodological expertise / research management experience / event management / public cmmunication of results to members or constituents . . . Wd that help them speed along? Or wd it hinder? On 02/09/2011 16:55, "Matthews N.S." <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear All,

Please find attached a template that can be used for the letters of support from partner organisations.

Jeremry, Sean, Lorraine, does this look ok to you? It's based on a previous AHRC EOI support letter.

With Regards

Nikki

________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Cubitt S.R. [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 4:13 PM To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft

Sorry I wasn't round earlier to respond tp this excellent set of coments - I have one document which must be completed today; after that I'll read the latest draft of the proposal, which I imagine already responds to these great critiques

sean

On 26/08/2011 04:14, "Volker Grassmuck" <[email protected]> wrote:

...

Thanks Sean for your first draft and Sally-Jane — Great to meet you again! Even greater if we would be working together in this centre! — and Lorraine and Franco for edits.

Franco, you’re right, we have to agree on a mode of editing. From the interaction so far, the wiki doesn’t seem popular, while everybody seems comfortable with editing text files. So I would suggest we go with that. Please turn on „track changes”. Franco, your changes can only be extracted by a time-consuming „compare documents” procedure. Lorraine, in your version nearly all of the text is marked as „newly attributed”. So again I’m not seeing your amendments. It might be an issue of me using OpenOffice. I hope we are not losing edits.

So I’ll continue from Sally-Jane’s version with a few edits and remarks inside the text and some more points here:

1. The call is expressly for a Centre for Copyright, not for IPRs in general. I was surprised about the strong emphasis on IPRs in the draft. Do you think it increases our chance that we offer them something more than what they’ve asked for, or decreases them for missing the point?

"We believe that intellectual property rights (IPRs) need to be assessed in relation to one another, rather than isolating copyright, when so many creative entrepreneurs and practitioners look instead to patents, trademarks and designs.” — Really? I for one have been embracing rms’s campaign against the term „intellectual property” because I agree from experience that bunching the very different systems does more harm than good. And then: Authors, composers, photographers etc. protect their works with patents, trademarks and designs rather than copyright? I can’t imagine what this refers to. Could you give examples?

What seems like an example for the problems of bunching: „Should the rigorous tests of originality in patent law be applied in copyright?” — Are you implying that this is the case and we are asking whether it should be, or is this a suggestion that it should be so? Confusingly, „originality” is used both in patent and copyright law but means something very different: novelty vs personal, intellectual creation.

2. "Demonstration of need." Here you list seven areas of research we’re going to pursue. I think they should go into the next section „key features”. I also think we need to talk about them a bit more, e.g. how does 1. modeling creative practice as business relate to 6. digital labour? For establishing need I think we should talk about a fundamental shift in the industrial basis and the disruptive effects of the digital revolution. The crisis in public funding of art and culture should be mentioned, as well as the millions that the Hargreaves-based copyright reform supposedly will add to the UK economy. The whole field is in flux. We are in a large-scale in situ experiment, inventing the future as we go along. To guide political and economic actors, systematic production of empirical evidence is needed (Hargreaves).

Then it’s asking for target sectors. So we should talk about the music, film, games etc. sectors and what we can do for them. As for distinctive features, I would highlight interdisciplinarity. Existing copyright centres are ’naturally’ located inside law schools and lack intensive exchanges with media science, cultural studies, informatics, art, civil society etc. which will be one of our Centre’s strong points.

3. Business: I understand that we are catering to "painfully retarded "Creative Britain” thinkers”. But: "The creative economy is not in large part industrial in structure.” I think this is overdoing catering to the SME trope. Large corporations are in fact responsible for a large part of revenues and jobs in creative industries and most of copyright lobbying. Also, SMEs don’t come up again in the rest of the text. P2P is mentioned only because large companies are using it. And then you mention that start-ups = SMEs are typically bought out by market dominators. If Sally-Jane is right in that this is a key concern we have to work on making it more consistent and compelling.

I hope this is useful for moving our discussion forward.

Best, Volker

_______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:start

Thanks for spotting that! S -- Sean Cubitt Professor of Global Media and Communication Research Centre in Global Art and Culture Winchester School of Art Park Ave Winchester SO23 8DL, United Kingdom E: [email protected] Web: http://wsa.soton.ac.uk/ Skype: seancubitt Work Phone: +44 (0)23 8059 6900 Editor-in-Chief Leonardo Book Series http://leonardo.info <http://leonardo.info/> On 05/09/2011 14:36, "Sally-Jane Norman" <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Nikki, all

Ouch. Just noticed while co-drafting with colleagues that support letter template specifies AHRC Knowledge Exchange Hub.... Perhaps rephrase as per below? ESPSRC and ESRC will be miffed if they're not mentioned. Sorry not to pick up on this earlier - multitasking noise.

RE: Statement of Support as part of the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy

XXXX wishes to express its full support of the Expression of Interest led by Prof. Jeremey Howells of the University of Southampton, entitled “Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy”, submitted in response to the jointly funded AHRC, EPSRC and ESRC Research Council call.

Etc etc

Not sure who else has been forwarding the template.

Best sj

On 02/09/2011 16:55, "Matthews N.S." <[email protected]> wrote:

...

Dear All,

Please find attached a template that can be used for the letters of support from partner organisations.

Jeremry, Sean, Lorraine, does this look ok to you? It's based on a previous AHRC EOI support letter.

With Regards

Nikki

________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Cubitt S.R. [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 4:13 PM To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] draft

Sorry I wasn't round earlier to respond tp this excellent set of coments - I have one document which must be completed today; after that I'll read the latest draft of the proposal, which I imagine already responds to these great critiques

sean

On 26/08/2011 04:14, "Volker Grassmuck" <[email protected]> wrote:

...

Thanks Sean for your first draft and Sally-Jane — Great to meet you again! Even greater if we would be working together in this centre! — and Lorraine and Franco for edits.

Franco, you’re right, we have to agree on a mode of editing. From the interaction so far, the wiki doesn’t seem popular, while everybody seems comfortable with editing text files. So I would suggest we go with that. Please turn on „track changes”. Franco, your changes can only be extracted by a time-consuming „compare documents” procedure. Lorraine, in your version nearly all of the text is marked as „newly attributed”. So again I’m not seeing your amendments. It might be an issue of me using OpenOffice. I hope we are not losing edits.

So I’ll continue from Sally-Jane’s version with a few edits and remarks inside the text and some more points here:

1. The call is expressly for a Centre for Copyright, not for IPRs in general. I was surprised about the strong emphasis on IPRs in the draft. Do you think it increases our chance that we offer them something more than what they’ve asked for, or decreases them for missing the point?

"We believe that intellectual property rights (IPRs) need to be assessed in relation to one another, rather than isolating copyright, when so many creative entrepreneurs and practitioners look instead to patents, trademarks and designs.” — Really? I for one have been embracing rms’s campaign against the term „intellectual property” because I agree from experience that bunching the very different systems does more harm than good. And then: Authors, composers, photographers etc. protect their works with patents, trademarks and designs rather than copyright? I can’t imagine what this refers to. Could you give examples?

What seems like an example for the problems of bunching: „Should the rigorous tests of originality in patent law be applied in copyright?” — Are you implying that this is the case and we are asking whether it should be, or is this a suggestion that it should be so? Confusingly, „originality” is used both in patent and copyright law but means something very different: novelty vs personal, intellectual creation.

2. "Demonstration of need." Here you list seven areas of research we’re going to pursue. I think they should go into the next section „key features”. I also think we need to talk about them a bit more, e.g. how does 1. modeling creative practice as business relate to 6. digital labour? For establishing need I think we should talk about a fundamental shift in the industrial basis and the disruptive effects of the digital revolution. The crisis in public funding of art and culture should be mentioned, as well as the millions that the Hargreaves-based copyright reform supposedly will add to the UK economy. The whole field is in flux. We are in a large-scale in situ experiment, inventing the future as we go along. To guide political and economic actors, systematic production of empirical evidence is needed (Hargreaves).

Then it’s asking for target sectors. So we should talk about the music, film, games etc. sectors and what we can do for them. As for distinctive features, I would highlight interdisciplinarity. Existing copyright centres are ’naturally’ located inside law schools and lack intensive exchanges with media science, cultural studies, informatics, art, civil society etc. which will be one of our Centre’s strong points.

3. Business: I understand that we are catering to "painfully retarded "Creative Britain” thinkers”. But: "The creative economy is not in large part industrial in structure.” I think this is overdoing catering to the SME trope. Large corporations are in fact responsible for a large part of revenues and jobs in creative industries and most of copyright lobbying. Also, SMEs don’t come up again in the rest of the text. P2P is mentioned only because large companies are using it. And then you mention that start-ups = SMEs are typically bought out by market dominators. If Sally-Jane is right in that this is a key concern we have to work on making it more consistent and compelling.

I hope this is useful for moving our discussion forward.

Best, Volker

_______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:start _______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:start

_______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:start