Updated: Graphic Exchange Publishes Interactive Rich Media PDF Edition

Canadian technology Graphic Exchange have just published an electronic edition – an interactive PDF featuring QuickTime video, QuickTime VR.

The 58 page electronic publication is themed around convergence and digital lifestyles and covers content creation, DJ culture and graphic design.

Additionally, to bring the electronic and print versions together, they’re now both branded gX and are published in the same landscape format.

“We have pioneered the use of new graphics technologies ever since we began publishing Graphic Exchange in 1991,” says gX publisher and editor-in-chief Dan Brill. “Our readership consists of creative professionals who are sophisticated technology users, so we felt that the time was right to take a radically different cross-media approach to the creation and delivery of pages for this audience. What we have is truly a twenty-first century publishing model – for both subscribers and advertisers, the new digital version is like a combination of TV and the Internet. Capitalizing on PDF 1.5’s ability to either embed or stream video and animations lets us bring our editorial to life, with rich media that emulates broadcast television – and we can even include commercials. For readers, web links in every article add a whole new editorial dimension to explore, allowing them to instantly use a browser to dig deeper into any highlighted word.”

gX are pleased with the new landscape format – for the physical edition it stands out on the shelf and advertisers get more space, but printed magazines are a pain in the neck to read in that orientation if you’re not crouched over a waiting room coffee table. On screen, however, it’s perfect.

The 92mb electronic edition is just one file making distribution considerably easier, and is available as a free download.

Quick Update: Having had a chance to have a decent read through the magazine after download, Jook Leung’s QT VR image of Times Square is *utterly captivating* and well worth the download alone. It is accompanied by a video of Jook talking about his work, and is a splendid example of electronic publishing.

gX

Google, Orkut and Affinity Engines’ Social Networking Suit

Google is facing legal action after Affinity Engines (AE) accused them of using their code in their Orkut social networking site.  This is all splendid timing for a company that is planning a major IPO.

They claim that the code was taken to Google by Orkut Buyukkokten, who had also promised Affinity Engines that he wouldn’t develop a competing social network product.

It’s not looking good for Google – nine bugs present is Orkut are also present in Affinity Engines’ inCircle product. In addition to the bugs, AE claim that there are textual similarities between the two sets of source code.

Google refuted the claims in a statement to Wired News: “Affinity Engines has not provided any evidence to Google that their source code was used in the development of orkut.com. We have repeatedly offered to allow a neutral expert to compare the codes in the two programs and evaluate Affinity’s claims, but Affinity has rejected that offer.”

Orkut is a Turkish citizen and was working on inCircle when he ran into some visa problems. Taking a job at Google was a way to get round this, but he kept working on inCircle – though signed agreements not to develop any further social-networking technology and confirming that any code he developed belonged to AE.

The name of Google’s new social networking site couldn’t be a more obvious indicator of who has been working on it.

Orkut

About inCircle

Man Charged For Google Adwords Extortion

Michael Bradley, a California resident who claims to have developed a program to generate fraudulent clicks on Google’s Adword service, was arrested at the company’s offices and charged with extortion.

Bradley had threatened to sell the software to spammers if Google did not give him US$150,000 (€123,400).

The fact that the software is designed to trick Adwords into registering more clicks, and therefore more revenue for the customer from Google, coupled with trying to extort money out of Google by then threatening to sell the software earned him a speedy arrest and freedom on a US$50,000 (€41,100) bond.

He’s pleading not guilty.

More about adwords

Dating on Demand

Video on demand: reasonable state of health, no proven business model, WLTM  established internet commerce concept for  broadband fun, and maybe a bit of transactional  processing, apply at www.hurrydate.com

I seem to be writing another of those “It had to happen” stories this week.

Dating On Demand is launching this summer – in Philadelphia, of all places. A series of events will allow singles (or at least people claiming to be single) to record five minute video profiles which will then be available on demand on Comcast Digital Cable.

Recording the profiles is free and even includes the services of professional television production crews. The profiles will be available to view free on cable and interested potential partners will be able to register anonymously through the HurryDate website.

Interviews and features will attempt to draw out interesting glimpses into singles’ personalities and will even include video “bloopers” and tales of dating disasters. HurryDate operate a speed dating service and are hoping that this will expand their market somewhat.

“This service is as close as you can get to meeting someone over a cup of coffee,” said Adele Testani, co-founder of HurryDate. Except with out the coffee, two way communication, body language and bare-faced lies, presumably.

“Dating ON DEMAND adds a personal touch to meeting potential dates by presenting ‘real singles’ – how they move, how they speak, their true appearance. Best yet, it all happens in the comfort of your home with the touch of a remote control and the click of a mouse.” HurryDate are keen to point out in their press release that no extra equipment is needed.

Is it me or does the name HurryDate add an extra air of desperation to the whole thing, like “Budget Bride”?

HurryDate

Budget Bride – Money Saving Wedding Solutions … I didn’t realise weddings were a problem

Record Your Day With SenseCam

There is a certain someone here at Digital Lifestyles who records everything – and I mean everything. He even records conversations with me. Whether or not he listens to them afterwards is a different matter, but he archives everything. When I saw the SenseCam this morning, it was clear that it’s his Ultimate Gadget.

With an accelerometer, passive IR detectors, light sensors and thermometer and wide angle-lensed camera, the SenseCam isn’t next year’s mobile phone, it’ a wearable device to help people with memory problems or assist obsessives in blogging their entire day.

The SenseCam has been developed by Microsoft Research Labs in the UK, and will be trialled at Addenbrookes Hospital in Cambridge.

The device captures 2000 images a day onto its 128mb Flash memory, and all sensor data can be fed to a system like Microsoft’s other archiving project, MyLifeBits.

MyLifeBits can then organise the data so you can go over the days events, or perhaps work out how you got into that lap dancing bar in the first place.

Future plans for the SenseCam may include heart rate monitoring or other physiological metrics – and no doubt there will be some military applications along shortly.

SenseCam

MyLifeBits

Josaka: Why Are Record Labels Ignoring Fans?

Kevin Harrington in the studio, courtesy Keith CorcoranMusic and user-created content go hand in hand – a love of music inspires many people’s first web pages. Kevin Harrington, former trouble maker at Sony and once a marketing director at the BBC, has taken the the idea several steps further – dissatisfied with the lack of involvement from big record labels, he set out to create the sort of web portal that would link local bands with their biggest resource – their fans.

The result was Josaka (you’ll have to visit the site to find out what that means), one of the most popular local music resources in the UK, with an impact felt across the world, not just in leafy Berkshire.

I talked to Kevin to find out his thinking on music’s relationship with the internet, owning the relationship with the music fan, and of course, getting the labels to “shut up whinging and pay attention to the fans.”


What inspired you to start building a site with this amount of content?

My first interest in creating a website was pretty much around the whole subject of “Why the hell does it cost £150,000 to have a corporate website created that has virtually nothing on it?” So, I set out to discover how complex or how simple it really was.

The site started off back in 1999, and it set out to support live music in Berkshire. Starting off creating a site from nowhere then, it was very much “Let’s do this and see what happens.”

It lists just about everything that I can think of that is going to help people find gigs or musicians. The consequence of having a huge amount of content on the site and having it pretty Google-friendly is that people all over the world are finding it, and there have been great successes: there’ve been local bands who’ve had their music played on American radio stations, just because of information that’s been published on Josaka.

Have you tried going through some of the websites from big labels to find information? The success of Josaka is hardly a surprise. There’s no competition locally, and there’s nothing going on nation-wide that competes with it.

Why live music? Were you drawn into this because it was something that record labels had completely ignored?

I have a love of live music, and at the time [of the launch of the website] I was actively involved in doing sound for a band, my wife’s a singer – live music is a very important thing. And I play the guitar badly.

What thinking did you bring to the website that was different from that you’d seen around the internet at the time? What influenced you?

There wasn’t a huge amount around at the time that could be classed as competition for Josaka, and this whole discussion of what is competition for a site is an interesting thing. At the time my thinking was very much “Why are we talking about this as a medium, why aren’t we talking about what the content is all about?” If you just start thinking about the content, that’s ultimately what influenced how the site developed.

The fact it’s on the internet does determine certain ways of delivering content, but the core thinking has to be “Who is the audience? Who is the consumer of this? Who’s going to benefit? Who’s going to read the pages on the site?” It has to be a very consumer orientated thought-process that gets you round to deciding how the site should be.

If I was the publisher of a magazine, I’d be much more concerned about the content rather than the format.

Why do you think the internet and music go together so well? It’s not just a delivery mechanism is it?

The reason the internet and music are so right for each other is that everything can be now, everyone can share, everyone has an equal voice if they’ve got something sensible to say, and the cost of getting the message around is remarkably economical.

What surprises me is that the people who complain about the costs of overheads to their business, like big record labels, don’t use the internet better. They should be the ones that are leading the way, they should be the ones that are setting up ground-breaking websites that aren’t just about saying “Aren’t we bloody wonderful?” They should be standing right in the middle ground and saying “Hey, we’re the heart of the music community!”, and they should allow themselves to be criticized on their own websites. They should use the format for distributing samples themselves, and take control of things. In it’s own little way, Josaka does that, but if I was a record label, if I was a Sony, I’d do it for the whole country. Just think of the impact that would have if it was done on a genuinely approachable, honest, open and fair way.

The whole issue of being able to share files and download MP3s, whilst important is not the core reason why there are websites about music. There are countless websites that you can’t download music from. I think the reason why the whole area of music and the internet sit well together is music becomes successful when it’s accessible and there’s a community feel about it. What the internet allows is a very strong feeling of community to develop quite quickly, which other delivery formats like a magazine don’t tend to do.

A comparison to that would be the NME [infamous UK music newspaper, the New Musical Express] – there’s very little sense of community with a thing like the NME. With a website, you can very quickly get that feeling of ownership from readers of the site by allowing them to have their views published in discussion forums and so on.

Now that we have websites about music, and bands’ own websites, particularly small bands – what social effect do you see this having on consumers? How will self-created content affect consumers’ habits?

There are obvious positives and negatives. On the negative side, the fact is that it is so easy for people who have no marketing, press or media experience to be able to publish their views – in seconds people can go and create themselves blogs or websites and if they get the tone of it wrong it can put people off going to see bands or going to see events.

I have recent experience of people saying that to me, from running quite a lively discussion forum on Josaka. I’ve had people who have read the discussion forum and decided not to go to an event because it sounded too cliquey. A lot of people go and publish things without enough consideration for how it’s going to be read.

The responsibility of publishing content on the internet is a considerable one, but there are no great rules for it. My analogy is if I went and stuck a huge transmitter on the roof of my house and started broadcasting radio or television, there’d be a whole lot of rules I’d have to comply with, and that’d be after I got my license, if was lucky enough to get one. I’d have to take it all very seriously, and there would be a lot more consideration about the content, but on the internet it’s remarkably free – and long may it be so. The downside is that people can pitch stuff in the wrong way for their target audience and consumers. On the positive side, there’s this wonderful, raw unedited immediacy to it, and it means that bands who in the past could never get feedback from audiences are now receiving it – good and bad – and they’re able to respond back, and dialogues start happening. That’s an enormously positive thing.

Now so many bands have web pages, how can they stand out? How do they still get exposure with the internet so crowded?

Ignoring the number of band websites for the moment, the real problem is that a band’s site is generally speaking a dull affair – which is why many bands have gone down the “let’s have loads of Flash everywhere” route. How many things can a band say during the course of month that’s going to get people returning to their site? I think that’s been the issue since bands first started having sites – if it’s just one band’s content, it’s not going to be that exciting, it’s not going to be refreshed, there’s not going to be that much news on there. There are exceptions of course. Sites like Josaka have benefited the Berkshire music scene as everyone is linked from the bands page, and all the key headline news gets published It becomes the place to go to find out the latest news about bands who are quite often 15, 16 years olds, pro, semi-pro – it doesn’t matter what size or scale they are, they all get a sensible airing if they go to the effort of making an event.

What’s the most exciting part of Josaka for you?

Free entry to gigs?

And?

One of the most pleasing things is that it’s been going for more than five years, uncontested and running successfully. It’s been doing that because it’s not run on a commercial basis – it doesn’t need income to survive. My standards for it mean that it has to get better and provide better content, and it has to grow – it has to constantly evolve and improve.

There are many sites locally that have tried to do similar things but they’ve always started off by saying “We’ll get some offices, they’ll cost UK£10,000 a year, we’ll have a finance director, we’ll get our income from banners.” You know the maths as well as I do – how many banner ads are you going to have to sell off a site to pay your rent?

For me, the most exciting thing is saying “This is a vehicle to promote live music”– at its core it has to be the content that lets it survive – not its saleability for banner ads. Editorial and content-wise it has to be successful first. If at one point in the future it became a commercial site, that would have to be in a way that didn’t dilute, interrupt or interfere with the content.

How much consultation with the public do you do to find out what people want? Do you talk to people at gigs? Questionnaires?

Most of the major changes on Josaka over the years have been driven out of asking the visitors to the site: I’ve done questionnaires and invitations to people to come up with ideas.

Because it’s such a passion, because it’s so successful, it consumes a lot of time – it’s my principle activity outside of money earning things. I’m going to another gig tonight, I produced a radio programme yesterday for Reading college.

What do you think are the key things you’ve learned?

I guess in the earlier stages I spent too much time quietly developing it and pushing it towards people and some of my character traits of being a control freak were probably too much to the fore. I’ve learned that the discussion with the audience and getting them involved, getting them to contribute, has been the major breakthrough for the site. When it finally twigged that it couldn’t be a sort of stand back “here’s the music business, come and get it” kind of thing, that was a turning point for me.

What thinking and ideas do you most admire in the industry?

We’re still a long way off downloads becoming that significant in the market place, and the current whinging from the music industry about how downloads are increasing and single sales are decreasing…

Down 32% this year, I believe…

… allegedly. If you’re in a band, the record label always tells you that you lose money on singles, you make money on albums. The singles are there to promote albums. There is an argument that says that the record labels should shut up whinging and be pleased that single sales are going down.

Album sales are going up…

If I sit down in front of my TV, there’s probably about fifteen channels of music on there that are playing new singles weeks before they’re launched, and they give me an idea of what an album might sound like. Let’s stop talking about downloads, let’s talk about how the music industry should promote their artists and bands so that these profitable things called albums sell. I think people are getting much bigger samples of music from cable and satellite than from downloads.

Downloads of singles and samples are probably a very positive thing for the industry.

The start point has to be labels appearing to engage the subject sensibly, and most of their forays into working with downloads seem to be led by the finance director. A bit of understanding of how the consumer wants to do things is the way forward.

Make music available to buy – the only reason P2P sites exist is because it’s often the only place to get some music. People are prepared to pay money. Record labels trying variable levels of pricing could actually end up setting the right price quite quickly.

As legal music services open up, people do use them. They often only turn to download sites when a particular piece of music isn’t available to buy.

A lot of people genuinely don’t realise the laws they’re breaking – that doesn’t make them innocent but shows how poor communication has been by the entire industry. Most people do respect the issue of copyright – what they don’t accept are the excessive levels of profit that appear to be made by record labels.

If record labels want to genuinely defend, and explain, and get CD consumers to agree that £17 is a fair price for a CD I’d like to see them put the case.

The industry needs to start thinking about the consumer. They’re worried – quite rightly because they’re looking after shareholders – about what appears on the balance sheet and the various costs of doing but let’s start worrying about what the audience wants.

I know a lot of people who would prefer to download music from an official band site. Why? Because they’re going there to sample a track before they decide to buy an album and they want to find out a bit more about the band. Pure download sites, whilst they’re very functional, actually from an industry point of view would be better if there was relevant and informative content surrounding it.

Then as an industry we could be saying “We might not be making a lot of money on the download of samples, but we know at the same time we are able to get the message across about a band or about an act, we’re able to get the imagery across, we’re able to get across gig dates, we’re able to sell merchandise, we’re able to talk about tour dates and we’re able to get people to subscribe to discussion forums.”

If I was running a band, one of my concerns would be about owning the relationship with the audience, owning the relationship with the person who is listening to the track. I want to be able to communicate with them – and that’s what the internet’s about, two way communication, it’s not just about someone downloading a track. That contact with either an existing or potential fan is enormously valuable. We know music fans are fairly promiscuous types of people, so use let’s a bit of intelligence, let’s use the medium to grab hold of them and retain them.

Napster has launched several new sites this year. When we discovered that the UK was twice as expensive at the US and Canadian versions, we were told by Napster that it was because UK industry charged higher wholesale prices than elsewhere. Why does the record industry in the UK seem twice as greedy as elsewhere?

To be blunt, they’re completely out of touch with the consumer. They cruise into work and answer a few emails before they go out for lunch. How many gigs do they go to? How many people in bands do they talk to? How many people in audiences do they see? Do they really have had any respect for the people that are fans?

I know there are exceptions to that, but as an industry it’s unapproachable. Even the big bands have suffered from the problem of becoming unapproachable. A lot of the bands that are linked from Josaka will use the sense of community that’s been engendered by the site to get to know people, to communicate both ways, to build up a base so that they can tell people about new material they’ve got. It becomes a friendly, fun thing to do. Music is not just about listening to music, it’s about who you listen to music with, where you listen to and and the group of people that you associate with. It’s a lot more than just having an MP3 or CD.

This brings us back to creating community sites, doesn’t it?

I know that Josaka has taken a ton of effort and has more than 1,400 pages on it so I recently did a cost structure on what it would cost to put together from scratch and produce that level of content, and it came out in excess of £100,000.

What really surprises me is that, with the relative ease of being able to put together an informative and useful website, why so few people have managed to do it in other areas. If every county had one, and they linked together, you’d have a really powerful tool to then go to record labels and say “Hey, if you want to get your message across, get the tone right for this audience and we can start talking to people through this vehicle.” And what happens? Big record labels ignore community sites.

Interestingly, there are quite a lot of small indie labels that probably employ up to ten people that send sampler CDs, press releases because they know where it’s at, they know where the audiences are.

So it’s greed and apathy from within, then? You don’t think it’s because people are getting less interested in music, because they’ve got lots of other things to spend money on like DVDs and games?

I see absolutely no evidence that people are becoming less interested in music, I see plenty of evidence that they’re getting pissed off with the pap that they’re being given by record labels. Time and time again, regurgitations of something that was once great, now in a really bad form by bands that frankly shouldn’t be bands.

There’s a healthy desire for recorded music, night clubs, live music, outdoor gigs, festivals. If people want to get involved in a market that is highly lucrative the music industry is the one to be in. Run efficiently, there’s a whole load of money to be made – but you can only ever make money in business if you’re doing what the customer wants.

I think you’re wrong to say that music labels are suffering from greed and apathy. I believe they think they’re being really dedicated, I believe they think they’re doing a good job.

The bottom line is, I think they’re out of touch with who the consumer is, do they really understand what the consumer thinks and believes or are they just going by the surveys they read in the Sun?

Headline news is an easy thing to respond to – it’s easy to react against “Single sales are 32% down!”, but what genuinely lies beneath that? I said earlier, I think that single sales being down is a good thing. Why should I spend £4 on a single? When I want the content of a single it’s because I want to understand what a band sounds like. By the time I’ve spent £4 I might as well buy the CD, but I probably won’t – I’ll probably just be a bit pissed off about it, so I’ll wait until I hear it on the radio. Or, hey, I might go and download it.

A lot of people on Berkshire Live might say “I’ve come across this band” and post a link to a track and all of a sudden you’ve got people talking about a band that hadn’t been talked about before. It’s exciting stuff, it’s dynamic, it’s real, it’s immediate. For the big record labels, immediacy is not something that’s in their vocabulary.

Josaka

Paula Le Dieu on Providing The Fuel for a Creative Nation: With Joint Director of the BBC Creative Archive

As a follow up to our piece on the Creative Commons licensing of the BBC’s Creative Archive, we were fortunate to get an interview with Paula Le Dieu, Joint Director on the BBC Creative Archive project.


Why the Creative Commons licence?
The first thing to make really clear, is that this point in time we are heavily inspired by Creative Commons in terms of the approach that we are taking with our licence. We sincerely hope that we will end up with a Creative Commons licence, but there is a possibility that we will go with a separate licence, with the very real aim to make it at least interoperable.

Was it because the decision content has been paid for by the public, so should be there for the public to use?
We didn’t start from that premise. We started from the premise that we had this fabulous archive and we had a requirement in our last charter, the one that we’re currently operating in, that expressly asks us to open up our archive. There had always been a strong feeling that we hadn’t done that as well as we could. There were many reasons for that, but with the advent of what was seen as more sustainable distribution mechanisms and technologies that would allow us to digitise and distribute that content in a sustainable way, the organisation began to feel that there was an opportunity to genuinely open the archive up and make it more accessible. In doing that it wasn’t a significant leap to think about what people might want to do with this material. Once we started to think about what people might want to do with this material, we then started to realise that one of the key values of this material was as fuel for the creative endeavours of the nation.

Once you start to understand that you want to provide the building blocks, you want to provide the fuel for creativity, the next question that comes up is “How on Earth do you allow people access and licence that material in ways that allow them to be able create their own derivative works?”

Of course, at roughly the same time we were thinking about this the folks at Creative Commons were thinking around trying to come up with alternative licensing frame works that would facilitate precisely that kind of activity. It was a really nice meeting of minds there.

What do you think the BBC’s adoption of this licence for its Creative Archive might mean for Creative Commons?
I would be purely speculating. What I would hope that it would mean for Creative Commons and indeed for other alternative frameworks is that with the BBC undertaking this activity and with the BBC thinking seriously about using alternative frameworks that we add a legitimacy to it, that we add this notion that being able to access content in ways that are facilitated by Creative Commons-like licences we are actually providing this fuel for creativity. It’s not just about people wanting to get content for free.

What do you think the BBC’s initiative will mean to other content owners and broadcaster? How do you think it will influence them?
From our perspective we’d be delighted if there were other people out there in the industry who felt they could take the same step. We hope that many will follow, and potentially overtake us – we hope we provide both the inspiration for others to think seriously about whether this is something that they can and would do, and pragmatically share our own learning and experience with the industry such that they can perhaps feel more confident to take that step.
Hopefully this will prompt content providers to be as generous with their content as the BBC, particularly in a world where companies are being more restrictive over what can be done with content, though licensing and DRM.This is where frameworks like Creative Commons are so powerful because they offer alternatives. They’re not going to be appropriate for everybody, but they do give alternative and people can see a different way of doing things.

What’s next for the Creative Archive?
At this point in time, the next step is to get some content out there, and we’re hoping to do that in September. There are a whole raft of areas that we need to cover off in order to do that and I think the licence is a really significant part of that. We have a number of production areas that we need to address in house also, we need to digitise the content and we need to think about how we’re going to distribute that content. The next big step for me is to get some content out!

What’s the distribution channel going to be? Are you going to build an massive extranet somewhere?
Initially, we are going to utilise the existing bandwidth that the BBC has available and not focus too heavily on setting up new or expanded infrastructure. Partly this reflects our interest in how audiences are going to use this material rather than trialling or experimenting with new technologies for the BBC.

For you personally, what’s the most exciting part of the archive? What are you most excited about seeing made available for people to use?
This is such a difficult question! It’s difficult for me because there are so many areas that I find thrilling around the Creative Archive. The licensing side of this is one of those areas that I never cease to be amazed and thrilled by. The depth of thinking that is taking place at the moment around alternative licensing frameworks really does start to point to a brave new world. At the other end of it, what that licence facilitates is a new way of the BBC engaging with its audiences and much more importantly, an new way for BBC audiences to be engaging with BBC material. With the Creative Archive, perhaps for the first time, not just invites but actively encourages our audiences to be part of the creative process. That for me is a really wonderful idea – the idea that we’re providing the fuel for a creative nation.

The BBC on the Creative Archive

Creative Commons

Iliad Translated into Microsoft Messenger. End of Civilisation Obviously Nigh.

Head to the escape pods, the end is near, friends.

The Iliad, the epic poem that for 2700 years has been our best dramatisation of the Trojan War, has been translated into Windows Messenger.

The poem’s 15,693 lines of achingly beautiful hexameter are now condensed in to 363 words and some smileys. All this for the 21st century “instant messaging generation”, and as part of a promotion for Microsoft’s chat application.

However, I imagine there were a few people like me in the 15th century who declared the the end of civilisation when the first printed edition appeared in 1488.

“The new ‘TrIM Troy’, a Messenger translation of the first five books of the 24 book classic tome, has been designed to give MSN Messenger’s eight million users a whistle stop tour of Homer’s world, the motives behind Menelaus’ rage, the bravery of the Greek army, the tragic death of Hector and the fall of Troy in their online lingo”, says the press release.

The upshot of this shallow and purely marketing-led butchery is best seen in its effect on the chilling opening verse:
Rage —
Goddess, sing the rage of Peleus’ son Achilles,
murderous, doomed, that cost the Achaeans countless losses,
hurling down to the House of Death so many sturdy souls,
great fighters’ souls, but made their bodies carrion,
feasts for the dogs and birds,
and the will of Zeus was moving towards its end.
Begin, Muse, when the two first broke and clashed,
Agamemnon lord of mean and brilliant Achilles.
Somehow, this now becomes:

“Ur right to still be ngry, Anchilles has m’ssed things up 4 da Grks wiv his rage”

I would class this as a lossy compression scheme, without any doubt.

Robert Fagel’s astonishing 1996 translation, available from Penguin

BBC Creative Archive licensing to be based on Creative Commons

In a significant step forward towards the opening of a portion of the BBC’s archives, the BBC today made their intentions for the Creative Archives clearer to other UK broadcasters and public sector organisations. The Creative Archive,  originally announced by Greg Dyke in 2003, plans to offer the British public free access to some of the BBC’s audio and video programming.

This afternoon the first meeting of an external consultative panel, which included many UK media holders, heard the BBC’s decision that it will base the Creative Archive usage licence on the Creative Commons (CC) model. This confirmation follows some speculation on the subject. The CC model turns copyright on its head by explaining the ways that the content can be used rather than saying it cannot – or Some Rights Reserved as they put it. By happy coincidence, Creative Commons 2.0 was released yesterday.

By applying a CC-type license to the content, the BBC will enable individuals in the UK to download released content to their computers, share it, edit it and create new content. Commercial reuse of the content will not be allowed.

Professor Lawrence Lessig, chair of the Creative Commons project was clearly excited: “The announcement by the BBC of its intent to develop a Creative Archive has been the single most important event in getting people to understand the potential for digital creativity, and to see how such potential actually supports artists and artistic creativity.” He went to enthuse “If the vision proves a reality, Britain will become a centre for digital creativity, and will drive the many markets – in broadband deployment and technology – that digital creativity will support.”

Lessig has been invited by the BBC to be a permanent member of external consultative panel, which is wise because he is clearly at the centre of Creative Commons and politically wise in the BBC becoming closely associated with the whole movement. This announcement will also be a huge boost in profile for Creative Commons.

Paul Gerhardt, Joint Director, BBC Creative Archive explains: “We want to work in partnership with other broadcasters and public sector organisations to create a public and legal domain of audio visual material for the benefit of everyone in the UK.” Those attending today’s meeting included Channel 4; the British Film Institute; the British Library; ITN; JISC; The National Archives; the Natural History Museum; the Museums, Libraries & Archives Council; senior figures from the independent production industry; BBC Worldwide. The BBC plans to keep those attending abreast of the project, while encouraging them to follow the same route to opening their own archives.

This news will give further hope to those who feel the BBC is a leading light in the usage and availability of content in a Digital Lifestyles world. Gerhardt added “We hope the BBC Creative Archive can establish a model for others to follow, providing material for the new generation of digital creatives and stimulating the growth of the creative culture in the UK.”

Read our interview with Paula Le Dieu, Joint Director on the Creative Archive.

Creative Commons

Gates Says Blogs Are Good For Business

Blogging is entering the mainstream – Bill Gates thinks they’re a useful business tool, so expect one of your directors to pop up with the idea of corporate blogs at your next board meeting.

Blogs are online diaries, usually collections of links, thoughts and illustrations kept by one person who wants to share information about themselves or their enthusiasms. They can be purely personal, or a day-to-day update on a business project.

Gates says that blogs are a good way to share information, both inside and outside of organisations and have considerable advantages over older forms of communication such as email (email is old now?). Emails can miss out the right people or be too imposing, and websites are too passive. People forget to visit websites, and get frustrated when they make the effort to go there and the site hasn’t been updated.

The solution? A blog with an RSS feed. Real Simple Syndication is a feed that allows stories to be pushed to other sources like news readers and even other websites. This way, changes and new information come to the reader, not the other way round.

Over 700 MS employees keep project blogs, to share information and keep others up to date on projects they are working on.

Microsoft doesn’t have a blogging tool yet – but it can’t be long before one appears, tied in with MSN, Messenger and quite possibly FrontPage and MS Project.

Blogging Platforms

Blogger

Movabletype

Blogs

GoogleBlog

Simon Perry