>> "I'm convinced that taking small sums of money directly from millions of people would establish a miserable, awful career-path."

I am not that convinced especially if the people paying are not forced to pay. I always saw micropayments as a donation system not a mandatory payment system. Like a small reward from a lot of people for the work you do - not a hindering level of access to your content. As a donation system I think it would work great and nobody would have a say in your work that way. They like it they pay you.
As said I would really really give a lot of small projects some small amount of money often and regularly if that means a) they can continue doing their thing b) they won´t add ads that sooner or later are going to control their content.
Its just that going through paypal everytime I just happened to like something is not working - it takes the impulse force away.

But maybe I am too idealistic....

and to the poster who said the article is about macropayment. If you talk about macropayment then micropayment is not that off topic. Its the tick to the tock and it sprung to my mind when I read the article. If it caused any inconvenience I apologize.

I am disagreeing with you on this matter. Just because there is no working system of micropayments it does not mean that they do not work. I have it multiple times that I would have spend 50p here and there for a comic that I quickly read and liked or a very investigative news story that I would have supported - of course I am not talking about mandatory "you need to pay to read" micropayments but more voluntary ones. Heck I would even buy vouchers for a micropayment system - say one for 10 bucks - that can then be easely distributed in small amounts among projects I like.
On the other hand I have to admit that really really rarely buy a book or other "free" media at all - I feel bad about it but I consume it in such quantities that I could not sustain to buy them (don´t blast me please its an honest self observation) - so if I could just give it SOMETHING would relieve me from feeling bad and give the maker another income. As said the hurdle to click your way through paypal etc. and the associated cost that can be higher then the micropayment itself has been stopping any micropayment system from being viable.
I recently have stumbled over spot.us - a website planning community payed journalism and I really like the idea but they ultimately will have the same micropayment problem - even worse for them they might have "the rich" pay for articles that concerns them - while the articles that concerns ordinary citizens will not rise to the top because noone is shelling out $50 just to see a newspaper article. The same goes for other media and I would even say making fiction because at one point people will cater - again - to the market with the highest return on investment - which is called sellout over here (no accusation to anyone yet). I really do not like "big" money rule what is produced. I wished a micropayment system would have emerged somewhere by now.

God I feel so insanely happy that we East Germans have been liberated from the evil Stasi Regime that was suppressing us all these years. You know its sooo much better now - I don´t even know what to do with all my freedom.

For the record. My parents were under constant surveillance in East Germany but they have never ever been body searched - ever. This shit is worse then it ever was in the former east block. I wonder when they come up with neighborhood promotions for people giving terrorism tips of their neighbors (and then in return receive favors for doing so). That is about the last thing missing - everything else has already surpassed the east german Staatssicherheit.

>Kieran, fully agree- in the EU there is much more respect for personal data, be it living in a companies database or on your computer, but the USA has certainly dragged it heels along gaining similar protections.

as can be seen by the countless of mass data leaks in the UK and in germany in the last year. or the sending of flight passenger information to the US - nowaday on EVERY flight you take - to the us and anywhere else outside the EU.
The only thing the EU is better at is keeping their citizens more confused and therefore more in the dark at what is actually happening.

so what is the terms of agreement at google for uploading content? Do they put the users in charge of copyright clearance? What about - may I mention it - embeds? Are blog owners embedding copyrighted material from youtube liable? (I have not come to a sufficent legal world wide conclusion to this as of yet and I am still researching since about 1.5 month in regards of embeds and Creative Commons).
This lawsuit open so many can of worms that the internet might spill out worms for the next millenium.

For a lack of better space I would like to thank the tireless folks at the mentioned institutions for making this possible. I never understand why the governments of this world make it so hard to access public knowledge. An open society where everyone just helps everyone without the exchange of money for the benefit of the greater good is the closest to garden eden I can imagine in the 21st century.

so what about trees? with the money invested in these machines that also use up energy by producing the machines in the first place why not reforest areas maybe try to push back deserts with trees stop cutting trees in the amazon and in middle afrika - you know all solutions that would give you more benefits on top of getting rid of the co2. Its rediculus that technology is supposed to mimic what nature does itself much better. Just ask the 800 year old oak trees in the back of my garden with their massive crowns they take in 10 times as much co2 as these machines ever could and they work over 700 years without repair or the need for spare parts. The hype about these "co2" washers leaves me absolutely baffled when the solution is much much easier and more readely available and might even improve live for lots of people - oh wait I know what it is - nobody is making tonshit money directly off off carbon capturing trees.

for all you stumbling on this I might point out that cory has responded on my blog (thanks again for taking the time) and the discussion goes on over there (sorry for a totally slow comment system (I get too much spam) that needs hand approval).

(I hope it is ok if I post a link to there here if not just delete this comment)

http://prototypen.com/blog/falk

Cory first of all - I have nothing against you or your site or whatever - I like it thats why I am coming here. Still I am a video artist and if I publish a piece under CC I do not want - even an embed - to be used to make other people rich.
I am sure you will explain to me the difference (its bits and bytes and doesn´t matter where they come from)... Its content from someone else inside your container - how about I embed the rss feed of boing boing into a an add supported "cool website" together with say some others make some editorial adjustments to it (say kill some less convincing stories) but otherwise do nothing else... I really do not see a problem with distributing content but when it says "not for commercial reuse" it means it and in add supported blog is commercial no way you turn it.

I am highly aware that this is one of the great controversies of CC and it has not been vetted in court but I see this as a problem - especially since you not even link to the guys webpage or make it a story in any way about him - you just plainly putting up his stuff on your website that generates money - embed or copy. He gains nothing. I would even say you didn´t attribute to him as your whole post does not mention his name once. Even so the begging of the movie asks very nicely about attribution and non commercialism.

I think its more an ethic thing then something that has to do with law. I am not against you embedding this piece per se but frame it accordingly make sure that the guy gets some attention that is more then this video (he has well deserved it) you know just things that you preach every day on this blog. This post is perceived by me (as a video artist sometimes publishing CC movies) as a rip-off - and perception sometimes forms opinions - yours may differ but I can´t see from your answer that it is well informed or thought about.

I was trying to stir up an informed debate and not a flame war and was actually wanting to get an opinion where your staff stands on this issue rather then getting a dog bark back personal offensive things. Maybe it was to harsh (and I know that I am too honest and forward speaking my mind without making it political correct) still some stand other then "its an embed stupid" (like I am commenting on creative commons and don´t know what an embed is or have not thought about embeds) would have been great and furthered the debate as I see this as an issue and its even more an issue with video then it is with text imnsho. there is a lot more too it but I am sure this comment is lost in time anyway - if you want to further a debate about it I invite you to do so - you say how and where ;)

I deeply believe this needs a debate rather sooner then later - I am reconsidering the use of CC (and I have been a supported since year one) because I do not want other people make money of my stuff and I know for fact other artists think the same (not even to mention that exactly this topic comes up when I speak to artists about how they should use CC in the first place - like "but people are just going to copy my stuff on their blogs and I don´t even get clicks or anything out of it - and they might even make money with their ads from my content" - I am not making this up I can name you three artists around here that have exactly responded the same and I couldn´t even defuse them as I am unsure where this leads as well)

POHJIE writes: "As far as I know, commercial sites are those that charge for access, not sites that use sponsors or gain revenue from ads. No money is being made from the sharing of this video, as clicking on an ad is not mandatory."

BULLSHIT. Boingboing generates money through ads which comes from visitors to this site which come to see the content that is on boing boing - I really think the hypocrisy on this blog about bloaking how great creative commons is and then show full work of art (not a citation) is just mind-boggling. Boingboing is about as commercial as it gets for a blog and still there are so many cc violations. I wonder how Cory would feel if I post a copy "Little Brother" in full on a special blog that has adverts in between the text put a small link at the very end to corys blog... Or better yet I distribute a printed copy in an ad supported dead tree version of aforementioned blog with full little brother in it.

I really think the boingboing staff needs to get a grip on where they stand - either make money but then leave CC "non commercial" stuff out or kill the ads - you can´t have it both ways and remain credible...

Now the work of art is great (and a link to the artist website and a pic of the video would have done the artist more of a favor).

This is beyond great. Acting superb, german is off limit to any understanding (portraying what the original felt like - lots of blah blah ). This guy needs to get an oscar.

I can see how this becomes a new trend - next stop politicans...

:)

I am sick of this reporting here as it just amplifies the mainstream meme. PLEASE get the facts straight - most tibetans believe nowadays that there is no path for them for political freedom and they would be happy if they can preserve their spirituality, culture and religion - yes the dalai lama believes the same things and if you have been to tibet and have been more then a tourist (by actually speaking the tibetan people, monks and the chinese living in the tibetan quarters) you will understand that what is happening now is their own suicide and I know that the majority of the Tibetans living in Lhasa and in the country side are getting along with the chinese rule and that things had gotten better (monestaries recieved money - back in 2000 that was when I was there - for rebuilding the damage that had been evaporizing them 50 years ago). Things where on track - not to restore a Tibetan independant nation - but a Chinese province with their own culture.
Just the fact that there are living more Han-Chinese in Tibet nowadays then Tibetans should open your eyes to the fact that there is simply no way to return Tibet into the romantic dream some "FREE TIBET" lovers in California are seeing. The more there is reporting about how great the uprising is the more people will die and you are complicit more so then the mainstream media because you a) have been there b) should have a clear realpolitical understanding c) should express a solution - personal as you are a person with its own publishing power.

I am deeply ashamed of this blog.

The Chinese Dragon has awaken and there is just no way anyone can stop him at this point - other then the protests ebbing down as fast as possible - otherwise there is no Tibetan culture, spirituality or religion left to admire. You have not understood that China will not bow to anything - they do not have to - the world economy is depending on them, they still have 98% authority over their population, things are getting better statewide so their own 1billion people won´t desert them. And if you ever spoke to a chinese person about tibet you will see that 99% of them believe tibet is was and will be part of china.

So you think 1000 or even 10000 protestors will be able to anything? Look at Burma where the movement was ALL monks (that can not be said of Tibet - I am very sure about that) and most of the population and it ended with a tragedy.

I know how good Tibet is controlled - or at least was 8 years ago - there is no way for foreign media to get the full scope of what is happening - only accusations and more violence and more death and in the end the only people loosing are the tibetans. I see the Tibetan quarter in Lhasa completely destroyed (quote me) after this and monestaries becoming pure tourist attractions with no practicing monks in them anymore - this was the fear 8 years back by a lot of monks - that if the small group of violent tibetans (which exist - the "old" warriors) will do something stupid their own existence is threatened. Its exactly what is happening now (peacefull protest, overhyped media coverage, rouge elements lay fire in chinese shops, mob takes advantage and loots, chinese military comes in - and clears out all trouble makers - making no distinction between those that are violent and those that are peacefull (like in any other conflict in this world - iraq for example). Expect the number of killed to be in the thousands by the end and expect the Tibetan Culture on the extinction list and feel very guilty you who have just spread a meme without questioning the consequences.

I was in Tibet in 2000 and spoke to monks - especially one particularly young one who was a very good english speaker. I was asking them what their thought about China and their situation was and he was downbeat. He said that basically everyone accepted that they are part of China now and all they want is to preserve their culture - that was at a time when there where only 40 individual tourists where allowed (that is outside guided groups) at once up there. I got the feeling that the destruction by the Chinese was already at a level of irreversibility and soon the monasteries would only be tourist attractions. The monk said things did progress a bit and got better with the influx of foreign tourists who bring money and the chinese gave the monasteries a bit to rebuild and lots of the rural ones actually where in the process of rebulding - just for tourism which is sad but it did seem to benefit the monks equally. Lhasa at that point was already lost (the biggest whorehouse in bigger political China was in Lhasa - the most sacred place in the world I would say).
I think the huge protests going on are not good for the tibetan communities - especially not for Lhasa - Han-Chinese already outnumber Tibetans up there and there is no way you can reverse this other then shooting a lot of people dead - its kinda like the same story as with the aborigines in australia just in the earlier stages.
The monk said that a lot of the people think it would be best to go for a recognition of their heritage and culture and live with the irreversible fact that they are part of the bigger China. It seems that the Tibetans in India disagree and meddle and I really really think there is a better form of protest in these day and age then bitter confrontation against a much bigger enemy that has grown to the big dragon that hold the world in check with just a breath of cheap mass labour. I sincerely believe the current events should be looked at critically for the good of the tibetan people because in China there is noone who can help them militarily and there is none willing to help them morally on in the powerhouses of this world - its best to see where the solution is not how to stir up so much trouble that another 100.000 of them disappear again.

I didn´t read the article because it was just a scam by cory to link us to advertising and make a fast buck - it sucks. At least there should have been a disclaimer after the link saying (I am making money from this link please bear the advertisement) or something to that extend. Ads destroy the web and we don´t want them especially not the intrusive ones as per the link above - you know pages that show nothing but an ad - no content what so ever. I would have thought cory has better principles then that.

Hmmm!

The photo included with this item is released on a Creative Commons non-commercial license, according to your note with it.

Since Boing Boing runs ads, I would assume somebody is making money from your site and as such, Boing Boing IS a commercial site. Thus, you are using that image illegally.

Shame on you guys.

I agree, boingboing either you are embracing the right thing and stick with it or just let it be. Stop using ads or stop using free culture stuff on your site - its your decision. With all the hits you are neither nonprofit nor have the rights to be above the fray. At least pay the original photographer a share of the clicks you get today.

Come back to me with a film that is good and has no violence. this makes me sick. how about a good story?

Reasons why I - as media producer - independent, creative commons loving, free software loving - will NOT support OGG Theora.

1. The quality is SH*T. Its substandard and nowhere near what a modern video codec should offer.
2. There is no support. You can not play it on any modern media player, noone has the plugins installed - they don´t even come with firefox. noone downloads plugins outside the hardcore geek community and in the end I want people to watch my video and not become entangled into an installer frenzy and then forgetting to watch the video in the first place.
3. the quality is sh*t.
4. Encoding speed is slow - about as slow as h264 on my machines. for the quality output this is not acceptable - its my wasted time and most indy video producers already don´t have any time waiting for their movies to finish rendering or managing all the other millions of tasks.
5. decoding speed uses as much resources as h264. I couldn´t trust my eyes but theora with its poor quality made the processor spin as much as a h264 VBR encoded movie. The whole reason why I would put theora into use would be so it would run on non up to date machines - yet it eats system resources for lunch.
6. browser plugin integration etc. there is none. the vlc browser plug in looks ugly.
7. flash is taking over - which is even worse then endorsing pure mp4 h264 that could at least be played with vlc. but it shows one thing: integration is the key, if flash would not have such a painfully big market penetration video on flash would have never been viable - its all about getting the content to as many people as possible even if these people see it at 10fps 120x80pixels, because once you spend 12 month of your spare time making a video you want as many people as possible to see your video - this is just not possible with theora.
8. all the problems that plaque free software: bad interfaces (starting on the plugin downloading websites, the player interfaces the embedding interfaces etc) a much to violently vocal community that does more harm then it helps the cause (the number one reason I do not use ogg audio either is that some geeks seem to force it into the net with brute, I have yet to see any person in my vincity to actually want to use ogg 99% of the non-geeks have no idea of what ogg is yet its available on most "alternative" p2p download sites.

and I probbaly could go on.
From a indy producer standpoint it would be better if all those forces would be bundled to make h264 a free open codec and then everyone endorces it before microsoft comes into the game and pushes an even more closed codec onto the net that will make flash even more dominant and make us all adobes slaves.

but i do understand that this is not how free software works. its all about anti doing things different as vocal and loud as possible.... sadly this approach will not and will never work for a video codec that needs cross browser cross platform full acceptence of mom and pop - because ripped game trailers are just 0.1% of the video watching market out there.

now rip me and reencode me with time shifted pixels....

no streaming. still.

get back to me when the couch potatoes can be couch potatoes and don´t have to be loading bar staring geeks.

perhaps miro should try to develop a free open p2p video streaming protocol that can use h264 vids at it source - everything else is a waste of internet time.

One word: no real streaming.

I have been looking at the "Internet TV" thing for about 10 years now and I have the opinion, that as long as you have no real streaming and have to actually download (and wait) for shows to play you will not get enough market penetration (oh god the words) to make any kind of impact on the web.

JOOST solves that - and I hate it because its another "exclusive" club with crappy closed source programming (as in the program and the TV shows).

Quality of shows as someone else pointed out will not be good unless there is a w-i-d-e-r audience and you only get a wider audience when its as easy as TV and it won´t be as easy as TV unless its streaming and it won´t be streaming >freely

Peercast has´t seen an update in years for video streaming (no I don´t think just ogg support will get you a "wider" audience - one that actually watches TV as past time and not to show off great tech) and the bittorrent streaming protocol has been dying in its tracks.

Unless miro can do REAL streaming or at least let me play stuff while its beeing downloaded its no better then iTunes or other RSS fetching stuff from a client/consumer perspective and these are the people who count. They don´t care if you can pay your bills for bandwidth - all they care is instant fluent uninteruptive streamed programming without much interaction - JOOST offers that and is therefore much close to TV then ANYTHING else out there. I just hoped they would have gone the open way - but seeing the Skype closeness it was foreseeable that this would not be the case. I do not get why you need DRM in the first place at all. Last I heard you want people to see you shows the more the better and including DRM in JOOST was about as stupid as adding DRM to CDs. (Break something that was working great that is).

So implement a distributed streaming protocol into miro and we are talking again - until then I will weep for the loss of a great opportunity to dethrone monolithic TV once and for all.
(Only thing that gives me hope that all the non-geek people installed JOOST looked at it and never used it again (must be this obtrusive performance hungry all eyecandy interface)