This article in the NY Times was a nice segue into editing what we hope is the last draft of the Legal Primer for Content Creators in Virtual Worlds.
Google has an interesting approach to copyright offenders: they make them ‘go to school’. We would question, though, whether a 4 1/2 minute video and 4-question multiple choice (guess) quiz will really deter offenders. We appreciate the fact that it may, perhaps, be possible that someone somewhere may not realize that if they didn’t make the cool content they want to share they are probably infringing someone’s copyright. But that seems unlikely in today’s interconnected world of sophisticated content consumers.
It is interesting that Google has decided to soft pedal their enforcement efforts by giving offenders what amounts to a one-time wrist slap for the ignorant.
When we were drafting, and then reviewing, the Legal Primer, we had a fair bit of discussion about how to deliver the information at the right level. We’re still discussing whether or not it is as accessible as it should be for an audience of visual thinkers. The term accessible, for uninitiated, can often mean dumbed down.
Since we’re writing about what is inherently a complicated topic, and a topic which is usually discussed in a great deal of dry, boring, legal jargon, we’ve been challenged to somehow deliver this information in a way that we hope won’t make our readership bleed from the ears, but without diluting the value of the information by dumbing it down.
As the primary drafter of this document, we are taking the approach that our audience deserves a more intelligent document than YouTube’s Copyright School, because we think our audience is smart enough to manage to read a document that is short on cute cartoon animals and long on words and weighty concepts. There isn’t a video (and no plans for one) and the text is a heck of a lot longer than a single above-the-fold web questionnaire.
Thinks for a minute…