Right to Privacy?
Yesterday, I read 95 Theses of Geek Activism and also briefly read a couple of the links from the same page... A few thoughts come to mind.
#1
Even though I haven't followed the whole story in as much implicit detail as many, shall we say industry (and journalistic) "pundits" have, I find myself falling on the side of Apple in the case of Apple vs. Does. The key reason for this is that if the object in question really was an industrial secret, then a company has the right, in my opinion, to retain that information, and release it when they see fit. Personally I read, Appleinsider, Think Secret etc pretty regularly. I enjoy the game (yes, I admit it) of daily/weekly scoops, guessing the next big (or small, it is Apple after all) thing that will change the world.
This siding with "The Man" also goes against other considerations such as free speech, privacy of the individual, fair use etc.
#2
As mentioned in the excellent 95 Theses, restricting and treating paying customers like criminals is foolish at best and sinister at worst. Also mentioned is the fact that geeks tend to see the extreme of the situation (and are advised to look at the arguments from a general user's viewpoint) because they, whatever the current crises are, affect us first... I could now go into conspiracy theorist mode (UK Data Protection Act, Echelon, UK Big Brother state...) but that's an article for another day.
As a designer, self-employed, and working under the banner of organisations like my company and the companies/charities I work for, I am wary every time I put an image or information up on the internet. In the case of my artwork, I make sure that, at least mentally, I consider the piece to be "practise" or "throwaway." If something is just too precious, then it will never reach the internet. It stays offline and is for print portfolio only. I don't want my images being used without my permission. At least not for commercial gain, or for some other artist to pass off my work as their own. However, do I care that somebody wants to use my picture for their desktop picture? Of course not. (and besides unless I post every picture as 400x300 I couldn't stop them anyway.) Which is where fair use comes in.
Of course there is far more to talk about in the subject. It's massive. And the more a person thinks about it, the more comes to mind. I think it unwise to polarise the argument too much, and I think as geeks we (I) often go too far with the various arguments that we (I) take on. After all, many of these issues, DRM, Trusted Computing, Fair Use, Privacy - in emails, online etc., are vitally important to us (me).
As a conclusion, the 95 Theses of Geek Activism states at number 15, "The true enemy is the line: 'If you haven’t done anything wrong, what do you fear?'".
Seconded, Thirded, and Fourthed.
Bruce Schneier on the Subject
#1
Even though I haven't followed the whole story in as much implicit detail as many, shall we say industry (and journalistic) "pundits" have, I find myself falling on the side of Apple in the case of Apple vs. Does. The key reason for this is that if the object in question really was an industrial secret, then a company has the right, in my opinion, to retain that information, and release it when they see fit. Personally I read, Appleinsider, Think Secret etc pretty regularly. I enjoy the game (yes, I admit it) of daily/weekly scoops, guessing the next big (or small, it is Apple after all) thing that will change the world.
This siding with "The Man" also goes against other considerations such as free speech, privacy of the individual, fair use etc.
#2
As mentioned in the excellent 95 Theses, restricting and treating paying customers like criminals is foolish at best and sinister at worst. Also mentioned is the fact that geeks tend to see the extreme of the situation (and are advised to look at the arguments from a general user's viewpoint) because they, whatever the current crises are, affect us first... I could now go into conspiracy theorist mode (UK Data Protection Act, Echelon, UK Big Brother state...) but that's an article for another day.
As a designer, self-employed, and working under the banner of organisations like my company and the companies/charities I work for, I am wary every time I put an image or information up on the internet. In the case of my artwork, I make sure that, at least mentally, I consider the piece to be "practise" or "throwaway." If something is just too precious, then it will never reach the internet. It stays offline and is for print portfolio only. I don't want my images being used without my permission. At least not for commercial gain, or for some other artist to pass off my work as their own. However, do I care that somebody wants to use my picture for their desktop picture? Of course not. (and besides unless I post every picture as 400x300 I couldn't stop them anyway.) Which is where fair use comes in.
Of course there is far more to talk about in the subject. It's massive. And the more a person thinks about it, the more comes to mind. I think it unwise to polarise the argument too much, and I think as geeks we (I) often go too far with the various arguments that we (I) take on. After all, many of these issues, DRM, Trusted Computing, Fair Use, Privacy - in emails, online etc., are vitally important to us (me).
As a conclusion, the 95 Theses of Geek Activism states at number 15, "The true enemy is the line: 'If you haven’t done anything wrong, what do you fear?'".
Seconded, Thirded, and Fourthed.
Bruce Schneier on the Subject
posted by Aaronius at 11:24 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home