Sean, Attached is the revised costing for the bid. As you can see the total is now coming to £4.4m. I am still waiting on confirmation as to whether or not there would be any more Institutional contribution from Sussex and I will update you with that if anything changes. Regards, Clare -----Original Message----- From: Cubitt S.R. Sent: 07 September 2011 17:11 To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Cc: Taylor C.; Amelia Wakeford; Caroline Bassett; Ed Steinmueller; Kirk Woolford; Matthews N.S.; Taylor C.; Howells J. Subject: Centre: near final draft
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
Dear all, everything is coming together nicely, analytical foundation, theory and practice, costings and an impressive list of partners, although "we have received preliminary support from” is risky if one of the readers is well connected with some of them and checks whether they have actually given preliminary support. Small, mostly cosmetic changes in the text, mostly included in previous ver (11-09-06_southampton copyright drafts-v3.0sc_vg.doc) but lost along the way. Some more comments here: Am 07.09.2011 um 14:40 schrieb Cubitt S.R.:
I'm not sure how to process the two new comments: Text: Copyright is commonly held to provide incentives for authors and artists to create and for publishers to identify and promote new talent and creative works.
comment: "Ok, I come from droit dŒauteur but to my understanding authors are not entirely irrelevant in copyright either."
Doesn't the text already include them? (The sentence is basically one sent by Ed Steinmueller, if I remember)
Well, authors were included after I put them there. But the edit was lost. Saying that copyright is there to incentivize publishers is wrong even in anglo-american copyright. Please, we need the authors here. See suggestion in text.
And your comment on prpgramme 4: this had a big edit overnight after inputs form Ed and Gerhard: You say "HargreavesŒ Digital Copyright Exchange isnŒt primarily about CC & GPL, isnŒt it?" - does the new text avoid your problem?
It now reads: "Would a return to deposit in a national library, including detailed information concerning licensing, costs, and agents, open competition between copyright and alternative licensing?" GPL & CC are not competing with nor alternatives to copyright. They are a form of exercising copyrights. The debate about global rights repositories, Hargreaves’ Digital Copyright Exchange and reintroducing formalities is not driven by CC but by the needs of the regular rights trade. See suggestion in text. "The coincidence of digital transformation with a shift from public subsidy to IP-driven creative economies constitutes a large-scale, real-time experiment.” Privatization and phasing out public support for arts and culture is a very specific, i.e. neoliberal experiment. I don’t think we should make this particular political vision our own as a premise for the work of the Centre, which should equally take the public interest into consideration. See suggestion in text. "disparate models, including Creative Commons and Copyleft, have rarely been subjected to longitudinal analysis.” Very important point indeed. CC two years after its start noticed that they had missed the chance of accompanying research or even of keeping log files. But: The two terms are of different categories, CC is a concrete model while Copyleft is a general principle. Therefore I think it would be better to mention two other concrete models that might grow to have a similar impact but currently lack research: Kickstarter and Flattr. See suggestion in text. Just out of curiosity: In UK English „Prof.” gets a point, „Dr” doesn’t? A late reply from Bernt Hugenholtz, IvIR Amsterdam, came in, saying they are indirectly involved in a competing bid, so not free to join in this one. Apologies for late response. Hope this is still in time. A big Thank You to you, Sean. It’s been a pleasure working on this with all of you, and it would be great if we could build this Centre together. Let’s keep our fingers crossed. Best, Volker —— http://www.vgrass.de/ http://waste.informatik.hu-berlin.de/Grassmuck/
Dear all, We are almost there, just making a few last min checks. I will be sending the email and all documents to AHRC today. Deadline is 4pm, But I am to send at around 2pm incase of any IT problems. Fingers crossed. :) Nikki ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Volker Grassmuck [[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:49 PM To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] Centre: near final draft Dear all, everything is coming together nicely, analytical foundation, theory and practice, costings and an impressive list of partners, although "we have received preliminary support from” is risky if one of the readers is well connected with some of them and checks whether they have actually given preliminary support. Small, mostly cosmetic changes in the text, mostly included in previous ver (11-09-06_southampton copyright drafts-v3.0sc_vg.doc) but lost along the way. Some more comments here: Am 07.09.2011 um 14:40 schrieb Cubitt S.R.:
I'm not sure how to process the two new comments: Text: Copyright is commonly held to provide incentives for authors and artists to create and for publishers to identify and promote new talent and creative works.
comment: "Ok, I come from droit dŒauteur but to my understanding authors are not entirely irrelevant in copyright either."
Doesn't the text already include them? (The sentence is basically one sent by Ed Steinmueller, if I remember)
Well, authors were included after I put them there. But the edit was lost. Saying that copyright is there to incentivize publishers is wrong even in anglo-american copyright. Please, we need the authors here. See suggestion in text.
And your comment on prpgramme 4: this had a big edit overnight after inputs form Ed and Gerhard: You say "HargreavesŒ Digital Copyright Exchange isnŒt primarily about CC & GPL, isnŒt it?" - does the new text avoid your problem?
It now reads: "Would a return to deposit in a national library, including detailed information concerning licensing, costs, and agents, open competition between copyright and alternative licensing?" GPL & CC are not competing with nor alternatives to copyright. They are a form of exercising copyrights. The debate about global rights repositories, Hargreaves’ Digital Copyright Exchange and reintroducing formalities is not driven by CC but by the needs of the regular rights trade. See suggestion in text. "The coincidence of digital transformation with a shift from public subsidy to IP-driven creative economies constitutes a large-scale, real-time experiment.” Privatization and phasing out public support for arts and culture is a very specific, i.e. neoliberal experiment. I don’t think we should make this particular political vision our own as a premise for the work of the Centre, which should equally take the public interest into consideration. See suggestion in text. "disparate models, including Creative Commons and Copyleft, have rarely been subjected to longitudinal analysis.” Very important point indeed. CC two years after its start noticed that they had missed the chance of accompanying research or even of keeping log files. But: The two terms are of different categories, CC is a concrete model while Copyleft is a general principle. Therefore I think it would be better to mention two other concrete models that might grow to have a similar impact but currently lack research: Kickstarter and Flattr. See suggestion in text. Just out of curiosity: In UK English „Prof.” gets a point, „Dr” doesn’t? A late reply from Bernt Hugenholtz, IvIR Amsterdam, came in, saying they are indirectly involved in a competing bid, so not free to join in this one. Apologies for late response. Hope this is still in time. A big Thank You to you, Sean. It’s been a pleasure working on this with all of you, and it would be great if we could build this Centre together. Let’s keep our fingers crossed. Best, Volker
Newest and hopefully last v4.4 Editing is amazing Volker: I had to change the wording of one phrase to make it fit Now reads: Would a return to deposit in a national library, including detailed information concerning licensing, costs, and agents, improve the rights environment and trade in licenses via legal certainty for free licensing and the public domain? If not okay, be sure to copy Nikki Matthews Matthews N.S. <[email protected]> in any suggestion - in an email rather than a tracked change please! I did some other squeezing to get into word limits Even lost the point after Prof. ! s On 08/09/2011 12:49, "Volker Grassmuck" <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear all,
everything is coming together nicely, analytical foundation, theory and practice, costings and an impressive list of partners, although "we have received preliminary support from” is risky if one of the readers is well connected with some of them and checks whether they have actually given preliminary support.
Small, mostly cosmetic changes in the text, mostly included in previous ver (11-09-06_southampton copyright drafts-v3.0sc_vg.doc) but lost along the way.
Some more comments here:
Am 07.09.2011 um 14:40 schrieb Cubitt S.R.:
I'm not sure how to process the two new comments: Text: Copyright is commonly held to provide incentives for authors and artists to create and for publishers to identify and promote new talent and creative works.
comment: "Ok, I come from droit dŒauteur but to my understanding authors are not entirely irrelevant in copyright either."
Doesn't the text already include them? (The sentence is basically one sent by Ed Steinmueller, if I remember)
Well, authors were included after I put them there. But the edit was lost. Saying that copyright is there to incentivize publishers is wrong even in anglo-american copyright. Please, we need the authors here. See suggestion in text.
And your comment on prpgramme 4: this had a big edit overnight after inputs form Ed and Gerhard: You say "HargreavesŒ Digital Copyright Exchange isnŒt primarily about CC & GPL, isnŒt it?" - does the new text avoid your problem?
It now reads: "Would a return to deposit in a national library, including detailed information concerning licensing, costs, and agents, open competition between copyright and alternative licensing?"
GPL & CC are not competing with nor alternatives to copyright. They are a form of exercising copyrights. The debate about global rights repositories, Hargreaves’ Digital Copyright Exchange and reintroducing formalities is not driven by CC but by the needs of the regular rights trade. See suggestion in text.
"The coincidence of digital transformation with a shift from public subsidy to IP-driven creative economies constitutes a large-scale, real-time experiment.” Privatization and phasing out public support for arts and culture is a very specific, i.e. neoliberal experiment. I don’t think we should make this particular political vision our own as a premise for the work of the Centre, which should equally take the public interest into consideration. See suggestion in text.
"disparate models, including Creative Commons and Copyleft, have rarely been subjected to longitudinal analysis.” Very important point indeed. CC two years after its start noticed that they had missed the chance of accompanying research or even of keeping log files. But: The two terms are of different categories, CC is a concrete model while Copyleft is a general principle. Therefore I think it would be better to mention two other concrete models that might grow to have a similar impact but currently lack research: Kickstarter and Flattr. See suggestion in text.
Just out of curiosity: In UK English „Prof.” gets a point, „Dr” doesn’t?
A late reply from Bernt Hugenholtz, IvIR Amsterdam, came in, saying they are indirectly involved in a competing bid, so not free to join in this one.
Apologies for late response. Hope this is still in time.
A big Thank You to you, Sean. It’s been a pleasure working on this with all of you, and it would be great if we could build this Centre together. Let’s keep our fingers crossed.
Best, Volker
Great! Thanks again, Sean, for a wonderful job herding textual cats! Now I’m very curious to find out who we are up against. Best, Volker Am 08.09.2011 um 16:30 schrieb Cubitt S.R.:
That's it sent then
Decision day is 8th October
Fingers x'd
sean
_______________________________________________ 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/
Definitely Nottigham; I believe also Queen mary, where Matteo Pasquineli is based. No idea who else . . . 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 08/09/2011 15:45, "Volker Grassmuck" <[email protected]> wrote:
Great! Thanks again, Sean, for a wonderful job herding textual cats! Now I¹m very curious to find out who we are up against.
Best, Volker
Am 08.09.2011 um 16:30 schrieb Cubitt S.R.:
That's it sent then
Decision day is 8th October
Fingers x'd
sean
_______________________________________________ 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/
_______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:start
Dear All, Attached is the EOI that was sent to AHRC Thanks to all far hard work on this. 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." ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Volker Grassmuck [[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 3:45 PM To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Subject: Re: [Centre] Centre: near final draft Great! Thanks again, Sean, for a wonderful job herding textual cats! Now I’m very curious to find out who we are up against. Best, Volker Am 08.09.2011 um 16:30 schrieb Cubitt S.R.:
That's it sent then
Decision day is 8th October
Fingers x'd
sean
_______________________________________________ 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/ _______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:start
Cheers, thanks for everything Sean. Hope you're doing a Stewart Island right now. Best sj On 08/09/2011 15:30, "Cubitt S.R." <[email protected]> wrote:
That's it sent then
Decision day is 8th October
Fingers x'd
sean
_______________________________________________ Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy Wiki space: http://p2pfoundation.net/projects/doku.php/centre:start
participants (5)
-
Cubitt S.R. -
Matthews N.S. -
Sally-Jane Norman -
Taylor C. -
Volker Grassmuck