[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Jim Ancona wrote:
> I think this blog attribution thing is overblown. The Wired article says
> [1]:
>
> "Indeed, the team at HP Labs found that when an idea infected at least
> 10 blogs, 70 percent of the blogs did not provide links back to another
> blog that had previously mentioned the idea."
>
> Besides plagiarism, another possible explanation is simply that once a
> blogger see an idea in several different places, he assumes it's common
> knowledge.
>
> And show me a newspaper or TV station that consistently attributes
> sources for story ideas.
Doesn't the whole issue derive from trying to treat backfence gossip as
intellectual property? In other walks of life, we don't have copyrights
on casual conversation. Nobody knows who first told a joke or started a
rumor.
Free and open communication available to billions of people is just not
something our laws and societies are evolved to deal with. Right now we
are trying very hard to jam it into the private property can. Some of
it, who knows how much, may not fit in there.
Bob
> For a laugh, see the study authors' take on the press coverage, called
> "Why do bloggers kill kittens?"[2]
>
> Jim
>
> [1] - http://wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,62537,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1
> [2] - http://www-idl.hpl.hp.com/blogstuff/faq.html#10
|
