It may seem curious to assert that computer guys like myself are often grouped into the same taxonomy as doctors, lawyers and accountants. Granted, we can’t vouch for your character on a passport application. The thing that binds us with this unlikely group: the assumption that we can and will offer our advice or services for free.
Most of the time I’m asked benign things like which operating system I prefer, the best budget laptop/smart phone/web cam to purchase. However, one of the more troubling and predominating questions is whether I can procure a pirated copy of Photoshop, Windows or Office. I say “benign” because I knew these folks aren’t fixing to open a kiosk to sell software with hand-cut liner notes. Again, I’m not a lawyer, but last I checked I don’t think there is a decriminalized version of copyright infringement for personal use.
Typically, I respond by forwarding them to the open source community’s version of what they needed: GIMP, Ubuntu or Open Office. Unlike Steve Ballmer I don’t believe the fruits of the open source community are communistic – but I do believe that access to information is a right, not a privilege. That being said, I’m a fellow maker, and authorship is partly the source of my livelihood.
This is why certain cases of intellectual property have become so interesting to me. In case you’re not familiar with it, the magazine Cook Source hands home cooks and bakers tried and true recipes. Tried and true, it may be noted, by the authors who the recipes were stolen from. How do you know that the recipes are stolen? After all, two distinct parties may use the same ingredients as means to a similar delicious end. In this case, the admission of guilt came from the editor of the magazine herself, who credited the original authors of the recipes. In a frenzy of email with one of the authors, the editor mistakenly claimed the author owed her money, because her recipe had required heavy editing from Cook Source before successfully going to press.
I believe the normal recourse is for lawyers to duke it out and volley fines of $250,000 per copyright infringement. In this case, the outrage of those who backed the original authors were the deciding factor. A blog was started to publish the emails and fight for the honour of the recipes’ original author. The magazine was shamed into taking down their website. The editor’s claim that “Internet finders are keepers” was beyond her means to fight.
This story proves to me that though people are happy to consume pirated content, there are some cases where they are willing to defend authorship. Surprisingly, those who compromise intellectual property may wake a sleeping giant they never suspected was there.
Standing on the RIM of greatness

Your brand is your user experience
Are you obsessed with Pinterest?
Big Orange Valentines


1 Comment















