Thursday, July 15, 2010
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Monday, July 5, 2010
Saturday, June 26, 2010
50 Science Fiction Fantasy novels for socialists from China Mieville.
I just stumbled across this. It's a couple years old now. The link is to a list of fifty science fiction and fantasy works for socialists compiled by China Mieville. It was a refreshing find after spending the day in the splendor of selling Glenn Beck's latest literary abortion.
For those of you not in the know. China Mieville is an incredibly brilliant and innovative science fiction and fantasy writer. His work can best be categorized in the sub genera deemed by Jeff Vandermeer "the new weird," and contains elements of horror, fantasy, and science fiction. I highly recommend checking out his books, The Scar, and The City and The City. I know a lot of people liked King Rat as well, but I couldn't find any drum and bass mixes to read it to.
One of the thing, I like about Mieville is his politics, and how, while they inform his writings, he isn't heavy handed about it. Rather Mieville seemingly keeps them at arms length, slowly seeping in and tinging his worlds in their sepia tones. So, while his Baslag novels are shaded with all of the human tragedies imposed by a corrupt republic, in the name of mercantilism capitalism, there is always something twice as sinister threatening the city state. His heroes are also invested in that city and its culture even as they flee from, rebel against, or try to save its decedent and exploitative soul.
oh, and Mieville?!? The dude has a Ph.D in international law from the London School of Economics! How bad ass is that? Plus I think he'd beat most SF authors in an fight any day of the week.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Major Karnage Chapter 1. and other matters.
I was looking at the publisher Chizine's website, and found this. I haven't watched it yet, so it may be terrible, but felt obligated to post something on here. So...
I'm reading A Book Of Tongues right now, by Gemma Files, also out on Chizine. It is pretty good, despite bordering on gay erotica. When I picked it up I knew it featured a homosexual relationship, but it goes father than that. It's not the gay sex that's been problematic for me, its the presence of graphic sex as a major part of the narrative. If you have a kid under 18 it may not be appropriate. I probably would have put the book down if it was hetero sex, But my liberal sensibilities haven't let me act on any possible bias. I', glad I listened to them because the book has just gotten interesting again.
So far the book has been enjoyable, the weird west style is tight, the magic is dirty, multicultural, and dark. I see some problems with the end of the second act, but I'll save my judgment until I finish the book. I may or may not write a review, although given all I've read and not written about, I doubt this will be the book to change anything.
I'm reading A Book Of Tongues right now, by Gemma Files, also out on Chizine. It is pretty good, despite bordering on gay erotica. When I picked it up I knew it featured a homosexual relationship, but it goes father than that. It's not the gay sex that's been problematic for me, its the presence of graphic sex as a major part of the narrative. If you have a kid under 18 it may not be appropriate. I probably would have put the book down if it was hetero sex, But my liberal sensibilities haven't let me act on any possible bias. I', glad I listened to them because the book has just gotten interesting again.
So far the book has been enjoyable, the weird west style is tight, the magic is dirty, multicultural, and dark. I see some problems with the end of the second act, but I'll save my judgment until I finish the book. I may or may not write a review, although given all I've read and not written about, I doubt this will be the book to change anything.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Copyright, Digital Media, and Ethics
Recently a storm has been brewin’ on the web over columnist Randy Cohen address of book piracy in his latest Ethicist spot, published in the New York Times. A reader wrties:
Cohen approves morally saying that there is a disconnect between the law (downloading the book was clearly illegal) and the morality of the act (here Cohen approves). Cohen’s response has garnered varied responses. Paul Constant, the book critic at Seattle’s alt weekly The Stranger, agrees, while over at Moby Lives Megan Halpern writes a vitriolic rant against the column. Most importantly these responses and the original column itself raise an interesting point, what is ethical ownership of a book?
Obviously if you buy a hardcover book you own that hardcover book. You can read it any time you want, you can draw in it, you can lend it to your friends to read, and then not give back to you, and you can resell it. These are all accepted legal aspects of the book. But do those rights and ownership extend automatically to ownership of a digital edition of the book?
If you digitally copy the book yourself, you’re in the clear. Just like ripping a cd to your computer, or making a mix tape back in the day, you as the owner of the book have a certain purview called fair use. Fair use, legally and ethically, allows you to have some control over your copy of the book, or CD. It lets you have some control over how, when, and where you enjoy that piece of media. Fair use is less a moral dilemma of the public and more one for the artist and their artistic control, but its one that they give up to allow society to consume their work. They get fame and financial benefit and give up some control, and if they want more control, then they should be a performance artist and not an author.
Publishers may disagree, because they want to sell you digital copies. However, Big Pub should take a lesson from the Big Music. In the 1990’s and early 2000’s the music industry attempted to block fair use of music by mandating heavy DRM on digital music software, and loading up their cd’s with all sorts of cleaver tricks to keep people from pirating music. They even created a draconian piece of legislation which even today stifles digital creativity and innovation in Business, the DMCA. The result of all this was that people got ticked off at the music industry and stopped buying music. The rise of digital piracy isn’t associated with the rise of Napster or BitTorrent, it started when the music business decided that they had to force their customers to buy their music twice.
Since then the music industry has learned its lesson and adopted a model of distribution that doesn’t involve shackling consumers. The book industry shouldn’t either. If I buy a book, I have every right to digitize it. If that book is digital, than I have every right to print it, and read it however I choose. I even have the right to bind it into a book, whether the law completely recognizes it or not.
However, I don’t have the right to distribute it. Nor do I have the right to illegally download them. The music and movie industries have realized this, allowing internet radio stations to broadcast more freely, and removing DRM from their downloadable products. The movie industry had begun to distribute movies and TV online through Netflix, and Hulu, while the music industry has last.fm, and Pandora. Publishing has the same thing, its called the library. Many of which have begun to offer Ebooks for loan.
With legal means available to get a digital copy distributing, and downloading pirated copies, is not ok. Even if you bought the hardback, however people who spend $30 on a novel will admittedly feel like they have rights beyond normal. Publishers are realizing this and a few are moving to sell eBooks bundled with their hardback counterparts. However, that’s not what was asked. In the particular case discussed above, Cohen clearly missed the mark. We just don’t need to insult the man to point out his errors.
Here is a link to the original Ethicist Column, Constant’s Slog Post, and Halpern’s Open Letter.
“I bought an e-reader for travel and was eager to begin “Under the Dome,” the new Stephen King novel. Unfortunately, the electronic version was not yet available. The publisher apparently withheld it to encourage people to buy the more expensive hardcover. So I did, all 1,074 pages, more than three and a half pounds. Then I found a pirated version online, downloaded it to my e-reader and took it on my trip. I generally disapprove of illegal downloads, but wasn’t this O.K.? C.D., BRIGHTWATERS, N.Y.”
Cohen approves morally saying that there is a disconnect between the law (downloading the book was clearly illegal) and the morality of the act (here Cohen approves). Cohen’s response has garnered varied responses. Paul Constant, the book critic at Seattle’s alt weekly The Stranger, agrees, while over at Moby Lives Megan Halpern writes a vitriolic rant against the column. Most importantly these responses and the original column itself raise an interesting point, what is ethical ownership of a book?
Obviously if you buy a hardcover book you own that hardcover book. You can read it any time you want, you can draw in it, you can lend it to your friends to read, and then not give back to you, and you can resell it. These are all accepted legal aspects of the book. But do those rights and ownership extend automatically to ownership of a digital edition of the book?
If you digitally copy the book yourself, you’re in the clear. Just like ripping a cd to your computer, or making a mix tape back in the day, you as the owner of the book have a certain purview called fair use. Fair use, legally and ethically, allows you to have some control over your copy of the book, or CD. It lets you have some control over how, when, and where you enjoy that piece of media. Fair use is less a moral dilemma of the public and more one for the artist and their artistic control, but its one that they give up to allow society to consume their work. They get fame and financial benefit and give up some control, and if they want more control, then they should be a performance artist and not an author.
Publishers may disagree, because they want to sell you digital copies. However, Big Pub should take a lesson from the Big Music. In the 1990’s and early 2000’s the music industry attempted to block fair use of music by mandating heavy DRM on digital music software, and loading up their cd’s with all sorts of cleaver tricks to keep people from pirating music. They even created a draconian piece of legislation which even today stifles digital creativity and innovation in Business, the DMCA. The result of all this was that people got ticked off at the music industry and stopped buying music. The rise of digital piracy isn’t associated with the rise of Napster or BitTorrent, it started when the music business decided that they had to force their customers to buy their music twice.
Since then the music industry has learned its lesson and adopted a model of distribution that doesn’t involve shackling consumers. The book industry shouldn’t either. If I buy a book, I have every right to digitize it. If that book is digital, than I have every right to print it, and read it however I choose. I even have the right to bind it into a book, whether the law completely recognizes it or not.
However, I don’t have the right to distribute it. Nor do I have the right to illegally download them. The music and movie industries have realized this, allowing internet radio stations to broadcast more freely, and removing DRM from their downloadable products. The movie industry had begun to distribute movies and TV online through Netflix, and Hulu, while the music industry has last.fm, and Pandora. Publishing has the same thing, its called the library. Many of which have begun to offer Ebooks for loan.
With legal means available to get a digital copy distributing, and downloading pirated copies, is not ok. Even if you bought the hardback, however people who spend $30 on a novel will admittedly feel like they have rights beyond normal. Publishers are realizing this and a few are moving to sell eBooks bundled with their hardback counterparts. However, that’s not what was asked. In the particular case discussed above, Cohen clearly missed the mark. We just don’t need to insult the man to point out his errors.
Here is a link to the original Ethicist Column, Constant’s Slog Post, and Halpern’s Open Letter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)