Posted by on March 1, 2009
::begin self pimping session::
Today I’m working my ass off. Pumping out four new proposals before midnight and catching up on a ridiculous amount of work. Harnessing a new level of productivity. And so in my journal of “to do lists” i assigned myself a quick blog post.
To Do: list current projects in a blog post.
To Do: pimp self out on blog for speaking engagements
To Do: write a real microblog – something longer than 140 characters but shorter than a Mashable post
So here it is.
My narcissistic microblogpost: what i’m working on, some clients, speaking engagements etc…in no particular order b/c they are all badass.
conferences/ lectures
- Stanford University February, 2009
- Noise Pop Industry Noise February 2009
- SxSW interactive March 2009
If you have any questions about any of these projects, or speaking engagements please contact me at coreydenis[at]gmail[dot]com.
::end self pimping session::
Posted by on February 16, 2009
Right now, somewhere in the bay area, is a music-tech company you know and love having a bad morning. Right this minute. And the true core of the issue lies at the chasm between technology and policy. I only have a few minutes to blog today, so I’ll explain this quickly:
If a music service requires your participation, it is considered to be “Interactive.” The cost of using copyrighted material to develop an interactive product is different (higher) than developing a non-interactive product.
BUT…There’s no stipulation in any IP law or digital millenium copyright act for the reality of technology such that a user may actually interact with a product versus directly with the music (aka on demand.) There’s no clause for a case where the music is not interactive (internet radio) but interaction with the product enhances the listening experience. There’s no clause for the human and product transaction. Only the human-music interaction is covered. Which means the product is, according to the law, operating illegally if paying fees as “non interactive” when it has (even if unfairly) been determined to be interactive.
Unfortunately for everyone involved, there’s no verbage, no legalese, no written word to address any music product with this type of user experience. Interaction with a product is not on-demand music. The experience is enhanced by interacting with the product. How can policy measure the value of experience?
IDEA: Interactive though it may be, interaction with a product to enhance the experience of art is a different level of interactivity.
Perhaps the conflicts and legal battles within the music industry (roaring as i type) will seek to adjust according to progress and user experience.
Til then, there’s Rusty Hodge at SxSW 2009: Rewriting the DMCA
see you there.
Posted by on February 16, 2009
10 reasons why i blog, in no particular order
1. creative outlet; expression
2. share music, literature, movies, tv, entertainment that i enjoy
3. in retrospect it feels like a published photo album, logging a snapshot of writing over time
4. it’s scary
5. sense of community with other bloggers
6. my friend christopher may made me do it
7. i learn from my blog (ex: using certain languages for design)
8. exercises writing skills or lack thereof
9. data. i love data.
10. pure and total enjoyment
