If you want to be in Google, you gotta be on the Web. It seems so obvious, it’s a shame that in 2003 someone has to point this out. But people persist in complaining that information that is not on the web should nevertheless be given priority in Google.
on Lessig and copyright. I don’t understand how Dave’s position is different than the RIAA or Valenti. Can someone enlighten me? He says that he diverges from the entertainment industry because they don’t pay the artists. That difference has little or nothing to do with the copyright issue, does it?
, very graciously, to Dave Winer in his weblog. “Hey, Dave, peace. Of course I don’t mean that you’ve, literally, done nothing. Obviously and of course, you’ve done great things for the movement. Nor when I criticized the copyright system was I saying anything about you. (Obviously lots of people use copyright to spread knowledge, rather than hide it. Copyleft is still copyright. And I am, as my writing should make clear, pro-copyright.)”
. In a post today, Dave Winer wrote, in Scripting News, “I am open to supporting and working with Lessig, but we need clarification and possibly a discussion with the professor on his position re copyrights for software.” But yesterday he was trashing the guy: “To Lessig, who says we’re doing nothing, up yours.” Hardly sounds like someone who is open to working with the guy, does it? With friends like these, neither Dave nor Lessig needs many enemies. Because at base, these guys are pretty much on the same side.
I came to a blog by Brian St. Pierre, who, in a piece called Hacking the Law, suggests that as many or most of us on the Internet are also copyright owners, the Berman Coble bill could be taken advantage of by all of us. Dave Winer picks up the thread in Scripting News today: “I wonder if anyone at the RIAA has a copy of Scripting News on their hard drive? Hmmm. If the law passes, I could write a virus to find out. Of course it would have to look at all their computers to be sure we didn’t miss any.”