Category Archives: EDF654

History of Copyright

I find copyright history more of an economics lesson than a moral lesson. Power and money are the two true reasons behind the need to protect IP. Take a look at the attached timeline to get a view of the path of copyright law through the ages.

Prezi on Copyright Path

Copyright Timeline by Rebecca Missler

 

 

 

http://

While the current copyright laws were not built to address digital media they do provide a framework for conversation. The government, individuals, and corporations have been engaged in discussion around the . Future of Copyright 2016. Of particular note in the attached piece is the absence of high level engagement from the government. The government is stuck in a spiral of enforcing rules designed to protect commerce not protect creativity.

When looking at copyright laws the common glue is protection of content from making copies. However, the idea of making copies has morphed with technology. The original goal was to protect the economic value of the work. Single pay equal single use. I think the idea was originally created with the eye on corporations being protected against other corporations or business. Cory Doctorow makes the argument we should shift the mindset from protection of copy to more of a protection of use.

Excerpt: Information Doesn’t Want To Be Free

Laws that are beside the point can say all kinds of silly things, and the silly things will be beside the point, too. The reality is that as soon as the capacity to copy music (and, later, video) for personal reasons reached the average person, the world’s courts and legislators started creating a web of laws and rules that legalized this activity. They recognized that there was a difference between a music bootlegger setting up an illegal press to run off competing copies and an individual who makes a mixtape for a friend or records something off the TV to watch later.

The Internet era has conjured forth mountains of nonsense about the death of copyright. Reformers have claimed that copyright is dead because the Internet makes it impossible to control who copies what; copyright supporters have said that the Internet itself must be contained, to head off that grim fate.

This is rubbish.

It’s impossible to control who loans a friend lunch money, but that doesn’t mean financial regulation is dead. It just means that financial regulation has to limit itself to the kinds of transactions that take place on an industrial scale, among industrial players. A copyright regulation that is sophisticated enough to handle all the nuanced business questions that the industry encounters can never be simple enough for the majority of Internet users to understand, much less obey. And a copyright that is simple enough for a twelve-year-old Harry Potter fan to understand will never be sophisticated enough to regulate the interactions of billion-dollar entertainment conglomerates and their suppliers and vendors.

The ease of copying in the modern world has nothing to do with whether Warner Bros. can sue Universal for creating unlicensed Harry Potter theme parks. It has nothing to do with whether authors can sue publishers who print their books without securing the rights. It has nothing to do with whether movie studios can sue online stores that sell their movies without authorization, or cinemas that screen them without paying for them.

Copyright is alive and well — as an industrial regulation. Copyright as a means of regulating cultural activities among private individuals isn’t dead, because it’s never been alive.

Doctorow, C., Palmer, A., & Gaiman, N. (n.d.). Information doesn’t want to be free: Laws for the Internet age.

I feel that one statement is the crux of this discussion, “copyright as a means of regulating cultural activities among private individuals isn’t dead, because it was never alive.”  It is only when you step into the realm of commerce that the copyright discussion should apply.

 

Index

Collection I

 

 

Collection II

 

Collection III

 

Collection IV

 

FINAL

Not So Final

How has digital citizenship changed for me

Thoughts for the Next Class

IP of Color

Pantone was once upon a time the company with the book of color chips. In printing, I could ring up the printer and specify the colors on a page by using the Pantone numbers. It took all of the guesswork out of the conversation. I could say I want an image or text to use Pantone 232 and the printer would know exactly what color I want. Pantone 232, by the way, is the pink used in the Breast Cancer Awareness logos. When print media started to wobble Pantone got bold and created partnerships to build additional revenue streams. Did you know, your make up colors have Pantone color markers? Ever wonder why Brand A’s lipstick and Brand B’s lipstick are the same shade? It is because they are using Pantone colors to formulate their product.

Yes, colors are wavelengths but the combinations are formulas. Move further out you have more indigo move closer in on the length you have more blue. Pantone takes the millions of combinations, formulates the color, labels the color, and creates a universal standard. They did not invent the color, they invented the standardization of color communication. They locked into the process and the language we use to communicate the color. Pantone is providing a business of color matching.

The ethical debate begins with how can you own a color? Color is around us and is free for all, how can you actually own a color. In looking at the IP guidance from Pantone they are pretty vague around exactly what they own.

Pantone 

Pantone LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of X-Rite, Incorporated, is the world-renowned authority on color and provider of color systems and leading technology for the selection and accurate communication of color across a variety of industries. The PANTONE® name is known worldwide as the standard language for color communication from designer to manufacturer to retailer to customer.

The strongest point of their description is their notation around being known as the standard language for color communication.

If I say to you, I want to paint a house Army Green you have a general idea what color I an going to use. If I tell you I am going to paint the house Pantone 5535 you would immediately have a reference point for  the color I planned to use. Pantone does not own the color, they own the system of communication around the color.

Just to keep the conversation interesting and to make those of you anti IP even more crazy, I can take a Pantone color and own the color as it relates to my brand. Sticking to the use of Army Green, it does not mean no one can use Army Green but if I use IP laws and protect the color as my brand you could not pick up the same color and do the same activity I am engaged in without creating market confusion. Now, I am not talking about Army Green as a color to my house, I am actually talking about the use of Army Green by the military.  You could not pick up Army Green and launch your own Army Green Army without infringing on my ownership of Army Green in relation to my Army. Ok, I know, the color infringement would be the least of your worries if you were out to create an army but play along with my illustration.

To be a bit more practical we will use the illustration of Tiffany Blue. Pantone 1837.

When you see Pantone 1837 in print, online, in packaging and other media you know the color by the associated brand. Pantone 1837 is the language used to describe the formula. If you try to use Pantone 1837 in relation to a gift store or jewelry store it is not Pantone who will come after you but Tiffany because you are introducing market confusion.

So we are right back to square one, should companies or individuals be allowed to own color. I say, with limitations. You do not own Tiffany Blue you own the use of Tiffany Blue as it relates to the commercial enterprise.  Should Pantone color charts be free to all online? I say, no! Pantone created the language. Pay for their creation of the language if you want their color conversation.

 

Get Productive

I am overwhelmed with emails at work. I kept a daily total for a week and calculated the average for just one week and am shocked with the actual numbers. The daily average of emails to me 273, emails where I am copied 307, and emails where I am blind copied 7. I know I am missing information due to information fatigue. If this is happening to me, it must be happening to those down stream in my organization as well. That prompted me to look at new ways to craft messages to capture the attention of the reader in short concise messages. If the audience reads the message the first time this increases my productivity by eliminating the number of times I have to repeat information. I found Powtoon.

Powtoon is a presentation software allowing the user to create animated presentations using a library of templates and audio files. You can add voice over, add video, or just go with the simple text. It took 4 minutes to build this Adam Intro. 

I am pleased to report 100% of my staff played the video and I have not had a single person ask for the “new guy’s” contact information. They have all reached out to him and are working directly with him. Mission accomplished.

How would I use this in the future? I could see this a replacement to bullet point training slides as well as introductions for meetings. I see tremendous use for this in the classroom both for teachers and students. I would love to turn a group of students free with Powtoon to capture and explain a concept.

 

Teaching with Powtoon

New Standards from ISTE 2016

“Student Driven Learning”

Check  ISTE 2016 Standards Overview.

I like the focus on the student. What do you think of the opening adjectives? “Organic, transformative,  and authentic” speak to me as I look at the value of using technology in the classroom.

Take a look at the 2016 Standards 2016 ISTE Standards

 

Reflection: “The Web We Need to Give Students”

The Web We Need to Give Students by Audrey Watters

Watters makes the statement “a Domain of One’s Own helps students build their own digital portfolio” and goes further to discuss the portability of said portfolio. Now it makes sense! Each school has their platform, their LMS, their servers. If you transfer you start all over again unless your content can plug in. You own your digital portfolio for life not just this year or in this school building you are not dependent on others to carry or curate your publishing.

The conversation of owning your domain can be summed up in this paragraph from “The Web We Need to Give Students”

“Giving students their own digital domain is a radical act. It gives them the ability to work on the Web and with the Web, to have their scholarship be meaningful and accessible by others. It allows them to demonstrate their learning to others beyond the classroom walls. To own one’s domain gives students an understanding of how Web technologies work. It puts them in a much better position to control their work, their data, their identity online”

I would call out some key points: With the web as well as on the web; beyond classroom walls; control..

With as well as on is noting the understanding of web technologies and gets to the heart of digital literacy. This is a prime example of understanding through doing.

Beyond classroom walls is highlighting the realization that through the web the world is local. You can publish and engage with peers around the globe as easily as someone next door.

Control is the root. Owning your domain puts the control in your hands not a corporation. Free Democratic Expression

A Domain of Ones Own-Reflection

A Domain of Ones Own

“A Domain of Ones Own” pays homage to Gardner’s belief of the power of building a personal cyberinfrastructure. The article notes  “five years later we have more than 6500 sites and 8500 users, and that number has steadily increased over these past five years”. This is a clear illustration of the student use of the personal cyberinfrastructure. I would have liked to hear from the student user point of view. Are students creating personal domains because it is mandated or out of desire? What are they learning from the experience? What happens post graduation? Are they maintaining their domain or is it abandoned? This piece did not answer any questions for me.

Reflection of “As We May Think” by Vannevar Bush

“As We May Think” by Vannevar Bush

“For mature thought there is no mechanical substitute. But creative thought and essentially repetitive thought are very different things. For the latter there are, and may be, powerful mechanical aids.”

The above excerpt from “As We May Think” by Vannevar Bush is a very powerful statement. What was the author meaning? I believe Bush was saying when applying higher level thinking skill and situational judgement you can not remove the human equation. This, for me, speaks to the ultimate goal in education of moving learners from knowledge to understanding. Use the technology tools for knowledge freeing the learner to move to understanding.

Knowledge vs

As Bush spoke of technology tools and future looking technology tools, the theme flowing through the piece drove home the need to move away from basic skill to free the learner for the chase of application at a higher level.

Bush says, ” But even this new machine will not take the scientist where he needs to go. Relief must be secured from laborious detailed manipulation of higher mathematics as well, if the users of it are to free their brains for something more than repetitive detailed transformations in accordance with established rules”.

In the above excerpt, the author pulls forward the idea that using technology to eliminate the simple frees the learner for application. Huge change to ask educators to move in this direction. We are still fighting over the use of calculators in the classroom.

“skilled in the use of symbolic logic on a high plane, and especially he is a man of intuitive judgment in the choice of the manipulative processes he employs”.

The true test of understanding is knowing what to do with the information. That is where we need to be heading in education. Why do I need to pack my brain with tidbits of information? Should I not be focused on understanding how and where to pull information and using my time and energy to apply the information?

For me, this article calls out the need to transform education from  content to methods. Is it really vital to memorize the date of key battles? What exactly do we need students to learn? Simply knowing key battles does not seem important. Should we move off of the old learning standards and move to application? Where do we want to see students go? Is it cause and effect, human interaction, cultural and economic impact, geo political ramifications, or should we learn dates?

Bush, to me, is spot on in his argument we will not progress unless we give up the repetitive and basic tasks to technology freeing the mind for mature thought.

Model Curriculum for Digital Citizenship

Common Sense Media

digcit-overview-header

Common Sense Media

Versatile collection of lessons offering many options for instruction with students K-12 as well as lessons designed for use with parents. Includes professional development for educators, parent education connections, student digital resources, student print resources, teacher digital resources, and teacher print resources.

Price: Free

Grade Range: K-2, 3-5, 6-8, and 9-12

Platforms: Desktop, Laptop, Mobile Phone, IPad,

Language: English and Spanish

Standards: Common Core and 21st Century

Scope and Sequence:Link to Scope and Sequence

Teacher Support: Professional Learning Communities

Home Connection: National PTA Program

Pros: Bracketed age ranges ensure relevance of topic and images to the audience. The topics are current. The curriculum is available in English and Spanish in a wide range of formats. Formats used include audio, video, and PDF. Unique to this curriculum is the inclusion of professional development for educators as well as the addition collaborative projects for students as well as educators. The collaborative projects appear to be designed to show what you have learned as well as a means to improve the content for others.

The inclusion of a “mentor” opportunity along with professional development is an excellent component. This is in line with the “teach the teacher” idea of planting one expert in a building and letting the education flow outward.

Digital Passport game suite for grades 3-5 Digital Passport

Digital Compass from grades 6-8 interactive “choose your own path” experiences Digital Compass

Digital Bytes grades 9-12 interactive role play allowing the students to record and post to youtube. Digital Bytes

Cons: Organization of content is a bit haphazard on the site. No clear path to grab all content for an age range.

Bottom Line: Best free Digital Citizenship Curriculum I have found. Covers all student ranges in English and Spanish. Includes traditional teaching methods such as lecture and group discussion as well and incorporating digital tools such as video creation and blogs.

Ikeepsafe Digital Citizenship

IKeepSafe

About Ikeepsafe.org

 Non profit collection of global partners from technology, government, and education focused on creating a toolbox of materials for use at school and home when working with students on digital literacy. Includes links for parents, students, and educators.

Price: Free

Grade Range: k-12

Platforms: Desktop, Laptop, Mobile Phone, IPad,

Language: English *Project is a global project but I am not finding links to content non English in origin.

Standards: Did not find a link to standards

Scope and Sequence: Use a Balance Curriculum Matrix Matrix Link providing a light overview of the content

Teacher Support: Teacher Resource provide an overview to digital topics such as digital security and digital rights. Does not provide teacher certification or badging.

Home Connection: Parent Portal consists of a collection of basic videos, info charts, and research documents. The parent resources are not engaging or interactive

Pros: Supported by a wide range of individuals with a vast array of interests.

Cons: The videos are not available, the content is flat not interactive, the educator training information is not designed to get educators thinking beyond the basics. The Parent Portal lectures as opposed to engaging parents. The high school materials are not age appropriate.

Bottom Line: Does not live up to the potential of the list of partners. I appears to be an afterthought and underfunded. Might be a resource tool but not a stand alone curriculum.


Learning.com

 learning_logo


 Last is ikeepsafe

Start over

 

.

Changes are easy in a blog

I changed the theme of my blog by searching through the archives of templates available in WordPress. I decided to go with a neo trendy look to jazz it up a bit. This was the 5th template I selected. The others were too limiting with color and flow. I like the energy of this new template.

Additionally I added some widgets for pages and a calendar.

I also installed the wiki feature

I played around with the colors for backgrounds as well as the text colors trying to find the right combination.