Slashdot Mirror


Facebook, Google, and Intellectual Property

Scott Jaschik sends us to Inside Higher Ed, where a librarian explains why the tradeoffs we're facing with social networking sites — e.g. privacy vs. a space to build one's personal "brand" — echo issues faced years ago by academics who publish in journals that their institutions' libraries can not then afford. The author argues that, as the Open Access movement is busily restructuring academic publishing, we need to find a way of retaining the personal value to the individual of social networking and Web 2.0 sites, and not allow that value to be eclipsed by the commercial worth of the data the sites obtain about us. In the author's view, the tension is in "...the fundamental relationship between the individual's desire to share their thoughts and experiences with others and the commercial entities that provide the distribution channel for that act of sharing."

5 of 77 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Not wanted here... by AndGodSed · · Score: 2, Funny

    HAHA! I copyrighted mine! And since there is a great similarity in our brain structure - you, sir, are being sued for copyright infringement!

    And so it begins...

  2. Personal Brand by smittyoneeach · · Score: 2, Funny

    Personal brand!
    Facebook look: grand.
    With wave of the hand,
    Appear spontaneously planned:
    Burma Shave

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  3. Re:Room to shape personal brand by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Funny

    I think consumers should consider inter-operability more when making their spending decisions. Yes, when choosing a free service it is important to get your money's worth.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  4. Re:Not wanted here... by spamking · · Score: 2, Funny

    You can have my basic human rights when you can pry it from my cold, dead hands . . . oh wait.

  5. Re:Well lets take a look at slashdot by YourExperiment · · Score: 4, Funny

    The stories are submitted by the READERS (that is you), the comments are submitted by the READERS, the moderating is done by the READERS, the testing of new features is done by the READERS, the polls are suggested by the READERS, the new layout was created by a READER! Who earns money from this site? NOT the READERS! Yes, but who diligently scans the summaries for typos? Who checks that the submitted articles are relevant and well-written? Who ensures that we aren't subjected to dupes? Oh wait...