news

Sachi is the PI's Geek of the Week!

leelefever — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 05:29:04 +0000

Our very own Sachi LeFever is the "Geek of the Week" on the Big Blog at the Seattle PI. The Geek of the Week is a series of short interviews that highlight local Seattle geeks. Last week's geek was Bryan Zug.

My favorite answer:

When did you first know you were a geek? Describe that moment: My first grade teacher scolded me for finishing too many Schoolhouse Math worksheets, so I began sneaking them until I finished the entire box.

I've been wanting to tell that story for a while. It's sooo Sachi. As it turns out, Sachi is a geek in some ways, but not the sci-fi-loving kind. Read the interview.

Sachi is the PI's Geek of the Week!

leelefever — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 05:29:04 +0000

My favorite answer:

I've been wanting to tell that story for a while. It's sooo Sachi. As it turns out, Sachi is a geek in some ways, but not the sci-fi-loving kind. Read the interview.

Sachi is the PI's Geek of the Week!

leelefever — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 05:29:04 +0000

My favorite answer:

I've been wanting to tell that story for a while. It's sooo Sachi. As it turns out, Sachi is a geek in some ways, but not the sci-fi-loving kind. Read the interview.

Our Twitter Video Used in Mainstream Media - Thoughts?

leelefever — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:09:08 +0000

For the first time in Common Craft's evolution, one of our videos "Twitter in Plain English" is being used in the mainstream media. For the most part, we're excited to have our work in front of millions. However, it brings up some questions and we're curious what you think. A few facts:

The video "Twitter in Plain English" is 100% Common Craft's property and is licensed with a Creative Commons non-commercial, no-derivatives license.
Our names and a link to our web site appear at the end of the video
The video is currently displayed from a link on the front page of Twitter.com
Of the 5-6 media companies to use the video so far (examples below), only ABC contacted us first.
Of the 5-6 media companies to use the video so far, only ABC has attributed Common Craft as the source.
Snippets of the video are being used and sometimes the camera points at the video displayed at Twitter.com

So, media companies are using parts of our video/audio without permission or a licensing agreement. There is a big reason why this may be OK:

Fair Use - Essentially, a small bit of copyrighted work may be used to educate the public. However, some instances seem to go beyond Fair Use.

Other reasons may include:

Mistaken Ownership - Some may assume the video is owned by Twitter, Inc.
Ignorance - Assuming that the video is in the public public domain.

Now, I'm not writing to make a big hairy deal about the use of the video. The truth is, we're not sure what's appropriate or what to expect. In a perfect world, when a company would like to use our video, or a portion thereof, we would expect:

Attribution/Credit - We think it's fair to let the public know the source of the video
A Licensing Agreement that outlines the relationship. We're not looking for money in most cases - just clarity in regards to intellectual property.

While we're assuming that most examples fall under Fair Use, we can't help but wonder if these companies are aware that there is a small company behind the video, a company that has rules and expectations?

I'm curious what you think. How should we view the broadcast use of our videos by mainstream media companies? What can we do to encourage proper attribution/licensing?

Examples:

ABC Nightline - Used with permission

ABC Good Morning America - Used with permission

NPR Unger Report - Exploring the Darker Side of Tweets and Twitter Liberal use of audio, no contact or attribution.

CNN International - No contact or attribution

CBS Sunday Morning - No contact or attribution

KOMO News (local Seattle station) No contact or attribution

Our Twitter Video Used in Mainstream Media - Thoughts?

leelefever — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:09:08 +0000

The video "Twitter in Plain English" is 100% Common Craft's property and is licensed with a Creative Commons non-commercial, no-derivatives license.
Our names and a link to our web site appear at the end of the video
The video is currently displayed from a link on the front page of Twitter.com
Of the 5-6 media companies to use the video so far (examples below), only ABC contacted us first.
Of the 5-6 media companies to use the video so far, only ABC has attributed Common Craft as the source.
Snippets of the video are being used and sometimes the camera points at the video displayed at Twitter.com

So, media companies are using parts of our video/audio without permission or a licensing agreement. There is a big reason why this may be OK:

Fair Use - Essentially, a small bit of copyrighted work may be used to educate the public. However, some instances seem to go beyond Fair Use.

Other reasons may include:

Mistaken Ownership - Some may assume the video is owned by Twitter, Inc.
Ignorance - Assuming that the video is in the public public domain.

Attribution/Credit - We think it's fair to let the public know the source of the video
A Licensing Agreement that outlines the relationship. We're not looking for money in most cases - just clarity in regards to intellectual property.

I'm curious what you think. How should we view the broadcast use of our videos by mainstream media companies? What can we do to encourage proper attribution/licensing?

Examples:

ABC Nightline - Used with permission

ABC Good Morning America - Used with permission

NPR Unger Report - Exploring the Darker Side of Tweets and Twitter Liberal use of audio, no contact or attribution.

CNN International - No contact or attribution

CBS Sunday Morning - No contact or attribution

KOMO News (local Seattle station) No contact or attribution

Our Twitter Video Used in Mainstream Media - Thoughts?

leelefever — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:09:08 +0000

The video "Twitter in Plain English" is 100% Common Craft's property and is licensed with a Creative Commons non-commercial, no-derivatives license.
Our names and a link to our web site appear at the end of the video
The video is currently displayed from a link on the front page of Twitter.com
Of the 5-6 media companies to use the video so far (examples below), only ABC contacted us first.
Of the 5-6 media companies to use the video so far, only ABC has attributed Common Craft as the source.
Snippets of the video are being used and sometimes the camera points at the video displayed at Twitter.com

So, media companies are using parts of our video/audio without permission or a licensing agreement. There is a big reason why this may be OK:

Fair Use - Essentially, a small bit of copyrighted work may be used to educate the public. However, some instances seem to go beyond Fair Use.

Other reasons may include:

Mistaken Ownership - Some may assume the video is owned by Twitter, Inc.
Ignorance - Assuming that the video is in the public public domain.

Attribution/Credit - We think it's fair to let the public know the source of the video
A Licensing Agreement that outlines the relationship. We're not looking for money in most cases - just clarity in regards to intellectual property.

I'm curious what you think. How should we view the broadcast use of our videos by mainstream media companies? What can we do to encourage proper attribution/licensing?

Examples:

ABC Nightline - Used with permission

ABC Good Morning America - Used with permission

NPR Unger Report - Exploring the Darker Side of Tweets and Twitter Liberal use of audio, no contact or attribution.

CNN International - No contact or attribution

CBS Sunday Morning - No contact or attribution

KOMO News (local Seattle station) No contact or attribution

Our Twitter Video Used in Mainstream Media - Thoughts?

leelefever — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:09:08 +0000

The video "Twitter in Plain English" is 100% Common Craft's property and is licensed with a Creative Commons non-commercial, no-derivatives license.
Our names and a link to our web site appear at the end of the video
The video is currently displayed from a link on the front page of Twitter.com
Of the 5-6 media companies to use the video so far (examples below), only ABC contacted us first.
Of the 5-6 media companies to use the video so far, only ABC has attributed Common Craft as the source.
Snippets of the video are being used and sometimes the camera points at the video displayed at Twitter.com

So, media companies are using parts of our video/audio without permission or a licensing agreement. There is a big reason why this may be OK:

Fair Use - Essentially, a small bit of copyrighted work may be used to educate the public. However, some instances seem to go beyond Fair Use.

Other reasons may include:

Mistaken Ownership - Some may assume the video is owned by Twitter, Inc.
Ignorance - Assuming that the video is in the public public domain.

Attribution/Credit - We think it's fair to let the public know the source of the video
A Licensing Agreement that outlines the relationship. We're not looking for money in most cases - just clarity in regards to intellectual property.

I'm curious what you think. How should we view the broadcast use of our videos by mainstream media companies? What can we do to encourage proper attribution/licensing?

Examples:

ABC Nightline - Used with permission

ABC Good Morning America - Used with permission

NPR Unger Report - Exploring the Darker Side of Tweets and Twitter Liberal use of audio, no contact or attribution.

CNN International - No contact or attribution

CBS Sunday Morning - No contact or attribution

KOMO News (local Seattle station) No contact or attribution

Our Twitter Video Used in Mainstream Media - Thoughts?

leelefever — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:09:08 +0000

The video "Twitter in Plain English" is 100% Common Craft's property and is licensed with a Creative Commons non-commercial, no-derivatives license.
Our names and a link to our web site appear at the end of the video
The video is currently displayed from a link on the front page of Twitter.com
Of the 5-6 media companies to use the video so far (examples below), only ABC contacted us first.
Of the 5-6 media companies to use the video so far, only ABC has attributed Common Craft as the source.
Snippets of the video are being used and sometimes the camera points at the video displayed at Twitter.com

So, media companies are using parts of our video/audio without permission or a licensing agreement. There is a big reason why this may be OK:

Fair Use - Essentially, a small bit of copyrighted work may be used to educate the public. However, some instances seem to go beyond Fair Use.

Other reasons may include:

Mistaken Ownership - Some may assume the video is owned by Twitter, Inc.
Ignorance - Assuming that the video is in the public public domain.

Attribution/Credit - We think it's fair to let the public know the source of the video
A Licensing Agreement that outlines the relationship. We're not looking for money in most cases - just clarity in regards to intellectual property.

I'm curious what you think. How should we view the broadcast use of our videos by mainstream media companies? What can we do to encourage proper attribution/licensing?

Examples:

ABC Nightline - Used with permission

ABC Good Morning America - Used with permission

NPR Unger Report - Exploring the Darker Side of Tweets and Twitter Liberal use of audio, no contact or attribution.

CNN International - No contact or attribution

CBS Sunday Morning - No contact or attribution

KOMO News (local Seattle station) No contact or attribution

Our Twitter Video Used in Mainstream Media - Thoughts?

leelefever — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:09:08 +0000

The video "Twitter in Plain English" is 100% Common Craft's property and is licensed with a Creative Commons non-commercial, no-derivatives license.
Our names and a link to our web site appear at the end of the video
The video is currently displayed from a link on the front page of Twitter.com
Of the 5-6 media companies to use the video so far (examples below), only ABC contacted us first.
Of the 5-6 media companies to use the video so far, only ABC has attributed Common Craft as the source.
Snippets of the video are being used and sometimes the camera points at the video displayed at Twitter.com

So, media companies are using parts of our video/audio without permission or a licensing agreement. There is a big reason why this may be OK:

Fair Use - Essentially, a small bit of copyrighted work may be used to educate the public. However, some instances seem to go beyond Fair Use.

Other reasons may include:

Mistaken Ownership - Some may assume the video is owned by Twitter, Inc.
Ignorance - Assuming that the video is in the public public domain.

Attribution/Credit - We think it's fair to let the public know the source of the video
A Licensing Agreement that outlines the relationship. We're not looking for money in most cases - just clarity in regards to intellectual property.

I'm curious what you think. How should we view the broadcast use of our videos by mainstream media companies? What can we do to encourage proper attribution/licensing?

Examples:

ABC Nightline - Used with permission

ABC Good Morning America - Used with permission

NPR Unger Report - Exploring the Darker Side of Tweets and Twitter Liberal use of audio, no contact or attribution.

CNN International - No contact or attribution

CBS Sunday Morning - No contact or attribution

KOMO News (local Seattle station) No contact or attribution

Our Twitter Video Used in Mainstream Media - Thoughts?

leelefever — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:09:08 +0000

The video "Twitter in Plain English" is 100% Common Craft's property and is licensed with a Creative Commons non-commercial, no-derivatives license.
Our names and a link to our web site appear at the end of the video
The video is currently displayed from a link on the front page of Twitter.com
Of the 5-6 media companies to use the video so far (examples below), only ABC contacted us first.
Of the 5-6 media companies to use the video so far, only ABC has attributed Common Craft as the source.
Snippets of the video are being used and sometimes the camera points at the video displayed at Twitter.com

So, media companies are using parts of our video/audio without permission or a licensing agreement. There is a big reason why this may be OK:

Fair Use - Essentially, a small bit of copyrighted work may be used to educate the public. However, some instances seem to go beyond Fair Use.

Other reasons may include:

Mistaken Ownership - Some may assume the video is owned by Twitter, Inc.
Ignorance - Assuming that the video is in the public public domain.

Attribution/Credit - We think it's fair to let the public know the source of the video
A Licensing Agreement that outlines the relationship. We're not looking for money in most cases - just clarity in regards to intellectual property.

I'm curious what you think. How should we view the broadcast use of our videos by mainstream media companies? What can we do to encourage proper attribution/licensing?

Examples:

ABC Nightline - Used with permission

ABC Good Morning America - Used with permission

NPR Unger Report - Exploring the Darker Side of Tweets and Twitter Liberal use of audio, no contact or attribution.

CNN International - No contact or attribution

CBS Sunday Morning - No contact or attribution

KOMO News (local Seattle station) No contact or attribution