ARTBASE (3)
PORTFOLIO (2)
BIO
Rob Myers is an artist and hacker based in the UK.
I have been creating images of the contemporary social and cultural environment through programming, design software and visual remixing since the early 1990s. My work is influenced by popular culture and high art in equal measures. My interest in remixing and sampling has led to my involvement in the Free Culture movement. I have been involved in the public consultation regarding the Creative Commons 2.0 and CC-UK licenses. All my visual art is available under a Creative Commons license.
My interest in programming has led to my involvement with the Free Software movement. I developed the Macintosh version of the Gwydion Dylan programming language compiler. All my software is available under the GNU GPL.
I have been creating images of the contemporary social and cultural environment through programming, design software and visual remixing since the early 1990s. My work is influenced by popular culture and high art in equal measures. My interest in remixing and sampling has led to my involvement in the Free Culture movement. I have been involved in the public consultation regarding the Creative Commons 2.0 and CC-UK licenses. All my visual art is available under a Creative Commons license.
My interest in programming has led to my involvement with the Free Software movement. I developed the Macintosh version of the Gwydion Dylan programming language compiler. All my software is available under the GNU GPL.
The Social Contract Of Art Copyleft
The GPL is an attempt to formalise the code sharing social contract of hackers. It does this through the mechanism of copyleft, using a copyright license to ensure that code is made publicly available. The closest thing to a GPL for art are the Creative Commons licenses. But how well do they match the social contract of artists creatively using the work of others?
Creative Commons produce a number of licenses. Not all of them are copyleft licenses, indeed only CC-BY-SA (the attribution-sharealike) comes close to the provisions of the GPL. Creative Commons also produce licenses for sampling, file sharing and licensing work to developing nations. Altogether there are around 15 Creative Commons licenses for artists to choose from.
Many artists have licensed images online CC-BY-NC or CC-BY-NC-ND. The problem is that these are non-commercial licenses, which means that other artists cannot use that work to make work that they can sell.
CC-BY-SA allows anyone to copy or use the licensed work. Anyone can print or sell copies of it, and anyone can make new work that uses all or some of the original. This is a good match to the "Four Freedoms" of the GPL, and allows artists access to a broader culture of images. No "Joywar " under CC-BY-SA. You lose more control of your work - anyone can copy or sell it without paying you, and in return you get access to any work they derive from it and attribution for the use of your work. But however worthwhile GPL-style Freedom is, and it is, it may not be a good match to the existing social contract of art.
CC-Sampling is designed for music but can be applied to any medium. Like CC-BY-SA you can make work that uses part or all of the licensed work. Unlike CC-BY-SA, you must creatively transform the work that you use, you cannot exploit it as-is. You also cannot use use it in advertising. This requirement of creativity and opposition to corporate exploitation is intended to capture the social contract of musicians for sampling and mash-ups, but fits artists as well. This is a much better fit for artists, and protects work against simple exploitation, but may preclude some creative or beneficial uses of the work and may allow the access to less work than the main CC licenses.
To align work with the broader Free Software and Free Culture movements, CC-BY-SA is best, although it is important that artists understand what they are giving away and receiving in return under this license. To match the existing social contract of artists creatively using the work of others, CC-Sampling is best, although it may be limiting in other ways. Artists may baulk at placing work under either license. But like Willem De Kooning faced with a young Robert Raushenberg asking for a drawing to erase, they should rise to the challenge and see what happens when they let other people use at least one work to create something unexpectedly new.
(I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice.)
Creative Commons produce a number of licenses. Not all of them are copyleft licenses, indeed only CC-BY-SA (the attribution-sharealike) comes close to the provisions of the GPL. Creative Commons also produce licenses for sampling, file sharing and licensing work to developing nations. Altogether there are around 15 Creative Commons licenses for artists to choose from.
Many artists have licensed images online CC-BY-NC or CC-BY-NC-ND. The problem is that these are non-commercial licenses, which means that other artists cannot use that work to make work that they can sell.
CC-BY-SA allows anyone to copy or use the licensed work. Anyone can print or sell copies of it, and anyone can make new work that uses all or some of the original. This is a good match to the "Four Freedoms" of the GPL, and allows artists access to a broader culture of images. No "Joywar " under CC-BY-SA. You lose more control of your work - anyone can copy or sell it without paying you, and in return you get access to any work they derive from it and attribution for the use of your work. But however worthwhile GPL-style Freedom is, and it is, it may not be a good match to the existing social contract of art.
CC-Sampling is designed for music but can be applied to any medium. Like CC-BY-SA you can make work that uses part or all of the licensed work. Unlike CC-BY-SA, you must creatively transform the work that you use, you cannot exploit it as-is. You also cannot use use it in advertising. This requirement of creativity and opposition to corporate exploitation is intended to capture the social contract of musicians for sampling and mash-ups, but fits artists as well. This is a much better fit for artists, and protects work against simple exploitation, but may preclude some creative or beneficial uses of the work and may allow the access to less work than the main CC licenses.
To align work with the broader Free Software and Free Culture movements, CC-BY-SA is best, although it is important that artists understand what they are giving away and receiving in return under this license. To match the existing social contract of artists creatively using the work of others, CC-Sampling is best, although it may be limiting in other ways. Artists may baulk at placing work under either license. But like Willem De Kooning faced with a young Robert Raushenberg asking for a drawing to erase, they should rise to the challenge and see what happens when they let other people use at least one work to create something unexpectedly new.
(I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice.)
Twisted Aesthetics
Very good article on how the Republicans got people to vote against their economic self-interest (no, not the distraction of "the faith-based vote") and what to do about this in future:
http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/1866/
- Rob.
http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/1866/
- Rob.
Re: Fwd: This Week on NOW
On 13 Jan 2005, at 22:42, ryan griffis wrote:
> Begin forwarded message:
>> ...David Brancaccio sits down with Rushing, who left the
>> military in the wake of the controversy, for his take on whether or
>> not
>> Al-Jazeera is just a propaganda machine, or a valuable shaper of
>> public
>> opinion that is too powerful for the US to ignore. "Looking back on
>> it," says Rushing, "Al-Jazeera may be a more important front in the
>> war
>> on terror than Iraq was...it's the largest shaper of Arab opinion and
>> perspective in the world."
SIAW:
"Instead, here's something from a few days ago that's worth bearing in
mind the next time someone tells you that Al Jazeera is a wholly
reliable news source."
http://slate.msn.com/id/2111888/
(Yes, I know this is different from acknowledging its influence...)
- Rob.
> Begin forwarded message:
>> ...David Brancaccio sits down with Rushing, who left the
>> military in the wake of the controversy, for his take on whether or
>> not
>> Al-Jazeera is just a propaganda machine, or a valuable shaper of
>> public
>> opinion that is too powerful for the US to ignore. "Looking back on
>> it," says Rushing, "Al-Jazeera may be a more important front in the
>> war
>> on terror than Iraq was...it's the largest shaper of Arab opinion and
>> perspective in the world."
SIAW:
"Instead, here's something from a few days ago that's worth bearing in
mind the next time someone tells you that Al Jazeera is a wholly
reliable news source."
http://slate.msn.com/id/2111888/
(Yes, I know this is different from acknowledging its influence...)
- Rob.
Re: citizen king-mystery of truth
Badiou comes from a background in mathematics (real maths, not Deleuze-Guattari maths), so I'm guessing his baseline is maths, not theology. IIRC philosophy started as a critique of religion, so doubtless there's echoes in there. And maths is not without its philosophy.
As for changing the words but keeping the sense, both a mouse and a hungry lion have four legs. I know which I'd rather be locked in a cage with. ;-) But possibly this is language's insufficiency. Would art allow us to simply substitute terms into arguments whilst remaining coherent? Would this be an advantage or a disadvantage? How does digital media affect this?
Badiou outlines exactly what he means by "truth" in an earlier book. He has a very precise, if abstract, meaning for the word. He uses words like "finite" and "infinite" a lot. :-)
The first couple of chapters of "Inaesthetics" are pure gold. Philosophy and aesthetics, not culture theory sound-bites. The book doesn't discuss visual art that much (cinema's in there), but that leaves more for artists to do and I think it may be covered in the compendium of his work.
Hmmm. I need to set up an Amazon link that pays me commission. :-)
- Rob.
On Thursday, January 13, 2005, at 09:21AM, manik <manik@ptt.yu> wrote:
>
><<Original Attached>>
As for changing the words but keeping the sense, both a mouse and a hungry lion have four legs. I know which I'd rather be locked in a cage with. ;-) But possibly this is language's insufficiency. Would art allow us to simply substitute terms into arguments whilst remaining coherent? Would this be an advantage or a disadvantage? How does digital media affect this?
Badiou outlines exactly what he means by "truth" in an earlier book. He has a very precise, if abstract, meaning for the word. He uses words like "finite" and "infinite" a lot. :-)
The first couple of chapters of "Inaesthetics" are pure gold. Philosophy and aesthetics, not culture theory sound-bites. The book doesn't discuss visual art that much (cinema's in there), but that leaves more for artists to do and I think it may be covered in the compendium of his work.
Hmmm. I need to set up an Amazon link that pays me commission. :-)
- Rob.
On Thursday, January 13, 2005, at 09:21AM, manik <manik@ptt.yu> wrote:
>
><<Original Attached>>
Re: re: citizen king
On Wednesday, January 12, 2005, at 07:54AM, Jim Andrews <jim@vispo.com> wrote:
>Thanks, Rob. I can't find much on the Net about this book except
>http://www.sup.org/cgi-bin/search/book_desc.cgi?book_idD08%204409
>
>How did you come to this book?
I was looking for interesting contemporary philosophy and my Google-fu is mighty. ;-) I got the copy I ordered this morning, so I'll let you know if it's any good. What Badiou I've found on the web reads very well. I'm getting the big compendium of his stuff next:
http://www.continuumbooks.com/BookDetail.aspx?BookID
>Thanks, Rob. I can't find much on the Net about this book except
>http://www.sup.org/cgi-bin/search/book_desc.cgi?book_idD08%204409
>
>How did you come to this book?
I was looking for interesting contemporary philosophy and my Google-fu is mighty. ;-) I got the copy I ordered this morning, so I'll let you know if it's any good. What Badiou I've found on the web reads very well. I'm getting the big compendium of his stuff next:
http://www.continuumbooks.com/BookDetail.aspx?BookID