Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Here is my WEbook project link.
I still need writers. So if you read this, help me by posting a comment I can then post on my project. :-) The comment can be about anything you want it to be about, the purpose of this project the WEbook project is to show how people come together on these sites.
Also, if you read this, I could use some ideas about what else I can do for this gallery.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
I started a project on WEbook last week and asked for members of the community to participate. So far I have two members who contributed to the project. I'm trying to think of ways to get more people to contribute to the project. Right now I'm still trying to think about how I'm going to present this work. It might not be all that exciting for people to just look at my WEbook project. I'm pretty sure, on the other hand, that I cannot just take the writing of others in the project off of WEbook without their permission, which may be hard to get. So transferring the project to a new medium my be difficult.
Someone suggested to me that maybe I could create a project on WEbook that linked similar projects together in some sort of "super story." This idea is very interesting, but I'm not sure how far I'd be able to get with this before this creative project is due. It is something I will look into doing though.
Nonetheless, I'd like to open the doors of WEbook do my fellow MultiMedia classmates. If you would like to participate in my collaborative WEbook project visit the site: Collaborative Writing.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Monday, October 26, 2009
Reflecting the Draft:
My draft expresses most of the ideas I want to convey, but it does not wrap all the ideas together yet into a firm conclusion. I've kind of ended the draft without really ending the paper. I need to expand on the ideas I do have in my blog with more information gathered from the resources I have. Since this was a draft, though, I wanted it to mostly be my conclusions and assertions about collaborative online writing and (kinda) accidental anonymous posting.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
But I feel like this topic may not be broad enough or allow for much of a paper without being redundant. The review I received about my proposal from Professor Baldwin has me thinking about changing my focus a little to be more of the "anonymous" online writer. It has taken me some time to gather ideas about this, though.
Technically speaking a post is never truly anonymous. Your computer leaves a trace behind and that computer can usually be linked back to the person who was using it, even if it is a public computer. But that is only really in the case of law enforcement--normal people can't trace a post back to it's author if the blog does not display the name or information of the person posting. Is that Anonymous? Maybe ideas of the anonymous can be connected back to my origional thoughts: Collaborative anonymous pieces of writing, leaving no easily viewed mark of ownership, are automatically placed in the commons. I guess an argument can be made that single authors who publish anonymously--their work is still credited, still owned; why, then would collaborative writing be any different?
I think this is a good place to start if I want to use the ideas of anonymity in my project. Right now, my presentation does not reflect this change in thought because it wasn't totally clear to me that I needed more until I completed my presentation.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Large groups of collaborative authors may disintegrate the need for a single author.
The creation and the collaboration of creative works on community forums invents a sort of "protected" writer's commons, which can be shared with outsiders or other communities.
The collaboration of a piece of writing, when published, does not always "share" the wealth of the piece.
Collaborative writing takes the form of sharing ideas, giving feedback, or writing a part of the final piece. What levels of collaborations deserve a sort of "shared authorship?" What would sharing the role of author mean for the idea behind the single author? Would it aid in the idea of the disintegrating author?
If idea's are willingly shared, what does that do to single authorship? What level of sharing takes away the role of the single author as being the "inventor" or "initiator" of something new an creative?
What does this say about creativity itself? Does creativity develop within a single person or is the core of creativity something that develops in many but put together by a few?
If creativity is not something that develops in just a single mind, how can it ever be owned? Would creativity itself be the commons? Does everything ever thought about as "Creative" naturally fall under the concepts of the "Creative Commons Copyright?"
Is creativity like open source? (Like Linux.)
How does this define inventiveness? Can there exist patents on new ideas that have been seeded by creativity? Do the results from creative collaboration become owned? Are they technically the remix of the original creative thoughts?
Monday, September 14, 2009
"Just as with the early broadsheets, many blogs are published anonymously, or more specifically, pseudonymously. Blogging pseudonyms are generally not fleeting aliases but fixed public identities, which are strongly associated with a particular author’s style and ethos. The impressive proliferation of blogging as a form of writing has disseminated the category of “author” to an unprecedented level of true mass-culture participation, though the prevalence of pseudonymity in blogging suggests that “authorship” may be at once more influential and more disposable than ever before."
-- Anonymity, Authorship, and Blogger Ethics; By Amardeep Singh
The quote above taken from Anonymity, Authorship, and Blogger Ethics, by Amardeep Singh, sets the basic scope for this proposal. Blogs create an interesting atmosphere of sharing ideas, memories, events, and comments on the news. Since, the ideas of many are so often posted to readably accessible sites--where coincidental likeness between Blog enties/ideas and the unintentional and intentional borrowing of ideas from the environment, make it even hard to pin down author. Of course each blog entry is tagged by the author/poster of the blog, but because of the community atmosphere blogs create coupled with thousands of people reporting simular events and life stories--how is the author pinned down? Is there even the need of author when so much is borrowed or a like? Or is each blog entry, even with all it's likenesses to others and outside-the-blog sources, a personaly authored remix of events? How many remixes of the same idea can there be before it is no longer a reminx and instead a paraphrase of thousands of words writing in the past?
Reletive to the ideas of authorship on blogging sites, what of other writing forums. There a millions of hits on www.google.com when one searches for "Online Writing Forum." Some of these includes sites like www.webook.com, www.lulu.com, and www.writing.com. All of these sites, in their Terms and Conditions, give the author/user of their forum full copyright and legal right of the work that they have posted for as long as it is posted on their site. But, how does this stop the borrowing of ideas for the users who read and give feedback to different people's work--especially when there are so many sites and so many places another author could hide stolen ideas from another. With or without copyrights or legal rights. How do we define author on sites that are so public with ideas that anyone can come by as they surf the web? What about collaborative creative writing sites like www.webook.com where the point of the site is to help give and take ideas from the community--do those ideas belong to the whole, or to the individual who first posted it, or to the individual who actually makes it into a story.
Authorship was created a few hundred years ago. According to Rafael Heller, "...the origins of our contemporary ideas about intellectual property date back roughly three hundred years, to a series of lawsuits amount rival publishing houses…. The most immediate goal, for the plaintiffs, was to prevent their competitors from producing cheap reprints of their bestsellers.” (Questionable Categories and the Case or Collaborative Writing). Heller defines the time period when single person authorship was defined, but not necessarily collaboritive authorship, web authorship. But, Rafael Heller continues to say that the debates that follow dealing with concepts of copyright, sampling, and plagiarism are also traced back to legal battles that help challenge the ideas of “intellectual property.” Maybe, another set of debates are needed to help define the "Commons" and the idea behind "Remixing."
Amardeep Singh. "Anonymity, Authorship, and Blogger Ethics." symploke 16.1-2 (2009): 21-35. Project MUSE.
Heller, Rafael. "Questionable Categories and the Case for Collaborative Writing." Rhetoric Review 22.2 (2003): 300-17. JSTOR. Web. 14 Sept. 2009.
"Published Books, Poetry - How To Get Published - WEbook." Book Publishing Companies - Publishing Books - WEbook Online Company. Web. 14 Sept. 2009. .
"Writing.Com: User / Membership Agreement." Writing.Com: Writers, Writing, Poetry, Creative Writing, Fiction Writing, Poetry Contests, Writing Contests. Web. 14 Sept. 2009.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
I have found that a lot of Online writing sites will give the user full legal ownership over the ideas that they post. On websites like WEbook.com, the author has a copyright for the material that they post on the site by webook for as long as the material resides on the site.
(this paragraph is wrong look above)
Online writing sites do not always offer protection to people who post their ideas, meaning that web users that have access to that person’s writing can take it as their own and repost it on another site without fear of breaking any sort of copyright. Also, since most sites let people post their writing under a pen name—a sort of second identity for some websites—it can be hard to connect people back to their original work when there are multiple people with similar pen names on multiple sites all claiming to have authorship over a piece of work.
When these online writing sites allow for multiple people to contribute to one work, the ownership of the ideas or writing in the project become even more loosely defined. The leader of the project on the site tends to hold the most “ownership,” but again, there is little protection for the project leader and nearly no protection for the project contributors.
Blogs have nearly the same problem. Although, technically the writer of the blog (or post on a writing forum) owns the things that they write, the blog site itself offers little protection for their users, meaning there is no action taken when the blogger's work is copied and reproduced elsewhere. (At most, the penalty for copying thoughts on blogs is for the user who copied the thoughts to be "kicked off" the site. But there is no legal action which is taken)
"Just as with the early broadsheets, many blogs are published anonymously, or more specifically, pseudonymously. Blogging pseudonyms are generally not fleeting aliases but fixed public identities, which are strongly associated with a particular author’s style and ethos. The impressive proliferation of blogging as a form of writing has disseminated the category of “author” to an unprecedented level of true mass-culture participation,1 though the prevalence of pseudonymity in blogging suggests that “authorship” may be at once more influential and more disposable than ever before."
-- Anonymity, Authorship, and Blogger Ethics; By Amardeep Singh
So, authorship is defined in blogs according to Amardeep Singh in their article “Anonymity, Authorship, and Blogger Ethics.” The author of this article says that however influential blogging may be to the readers of the blogs, they might as well no be authors/owners to the thoughts within the blog. Do these blog become a part of the commons?
“…the origins of our contemporary ideas about intellectual property date back roughly three hundred years, to a series of lawsuits amount rival publishing houses…. The most immediate goal, for the plaintiffs, was to preent their competitors from producing cheap reprints of their bestsellers.”
-- Questionable Categories and the Case or Collaborative Writing; By Rafael Heller
These court cases helped design what is now called “Author.” But these only defined the meaning of single author. But, Rafael Heller continues to say that the debates that follows concepts of copyright, sampling, and plagiarism are also traced back to legal battles that help challenge the ideas of “intellectual property.”
“Specifically, compositionist have credited the historians with helping also to expose cultural and institutional prejudices against people who choose to write, read, and publish together, sharing the production and/or responsibility for texts. These prejudices appear to have powerful influences over no only the ways in which we teach writing but also the way in which we write about our teaching.” -- Rafael Heller
This kind of makes questions about collaborative writing while there is so much of sharing ideas on \line, in class paper “workshops,” how do we then define plagiarism when there is so much sharing of ideas and it is hard to trace the idea back to it's orgins?
- Rafael Heller
- Rhetoric Review, Vol. 22, No. 3 (2003), pp. 300-317
- Published by: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (Taylor & Francis Group)
- Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20058083
Monday, August 31, 2009
I feel that Ideas being copyrighted and kept for ones own gain is very curious.
1) Everything influences everything.
2) No one idea can be fully completed at one time. There are new technologies and information that is discovered day by day that changes and manipulates a single idea into something far deeper then it originally was. How can someone own and idea that needs to be expanded by other developments they have nothing to do with. It limits what the idea can turn into and delays the development of the human conscience.
3) It is ridiculous that someone can own something so non-tangible. Can you touch and idea? Can you store it away on a shelf? Can you file it away? Ideas float in space. They exist as electrical pulses in your brain that slowly leak out as energy that is expelled as you speak of it/act on it. How can you own energy? Energy is truly dynamic as it changes places and states...how can you copyright something that is always changing and developing into something new?
Multimedia, I think, creates a public common of information. Multimedia is everywhere and incorporated in everything. How can things so public be owned when, because of the public nature, it become "common knowledge". How can things so ingrained in society, as a part of a whole, be separated out to be owned when as soon as it is thought, it is there for the taking by anyone? Think of Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter..each have status updates where people put what they are thinking at that moment up online for everyone to see in the domain. Are their thoughts owned by the individual...can I not think the same thing without mentally citing a Twitter update and turning myself in for plagiarism?
Thursday, August 27, 2009
My earliest memories of web surfing are when I was visiting a friend who introduced me to things like Hotmail.com, NeoPets.com, Writing.com, and other such sites. I remember being amazed and confused by it. I couldn't quite grasp where all this information was coming from or where it was stored. I was fascinated by how much was already in existence on the web without my knowledge of it, and all I wanted to know was where it was coming from and who had the time to put it there. Before I was web surfing, though, I had a "kid's" AOL account that allowed me to get e-mail and instant message my friends from school who also had AOL. I guess that was before MSN Messenger was popular or Pidgon cam out.
I wouldn't say I hate the web, but I have to say there are parts of me that fear it and love it. I love it because of all the information I can find without having to leave my seat or trying very hard. I fear it because so much of my life has now been integrated into websites all over the world. My life is not my own and it is not private as long as I allow it to exist online.
My favorite site to visit is: