FOSCIS Week 7
2015 03 15
Oh, wow. Another reading about authorship. Weird. It's FOSCIS week 7!
- Piracy has a copyright date of 2009
- "Author" has a copyright date of 1995
- The Gist
- Piracy (chapters 1 and 2 at least) tells the tale of the origin of "piracy",
in the era of the printing press. Chapter 1 is an overview of the rest of
the book, as well as a handful of anecdotes about piracy.
- "Author" is a very dense philosophical article about the word "author", its
various uses and definitions, and how it they have changed over time.
- The Good
- I had never heard the anecdote about the pirate version NEC. That's dedication
to a ruse.
- "has even outlawed the promulgation of algorithms that might be used to
disable or circumvent copy-protection" - I knew the DMCA was stupid, I didn't
know it was THAT stupid.
- As a fan of etymology, it was interesting to read the detailed history
of the word "author".
- The Bad
- "Readers and commentators in the blogosphere reproduced the original press
reports many times over." Yes, the blogosphere. That thing that still exists.
(I know this is from 2009, but that still feels dated to use "blogosphere")
- "Author" is incredibly dense. I struggled to read it. I generally
don't have much difficulty with reading stuff (in English at least), but this
one was a challenge. I don't know if it was the scan, the font, or what; but
it was physically difficult to read as well as academically.
- "The utterly textual milieu of the poststructuralists is ruled by the critic,
or the authorless subject, as opposed to the author." If you say so.
- The Questions
- How did robbery at sea turn into a term used for copyright infringement?
- Why have territorial borders always played such a role in copyright? It
makes sense in older times when copying works was more difficult, but why
is it still such an issue today?
- What does the future of piracy look like?
- Piracy is an interesting read, and I may end up picking up the full version.
It is readable (definitely more so than "Author"), and relatively engaging.
I can always nitpick some word choice or grammar usage, but it seems well
- "Author" is nigh unreadable. The jargon is packed so densely (as well as
the text itself!) that it is difficult to comprehend. I'm not a fan of
philosophy in general, and this did little to change my mind on the matter.
2/5 <review increments>