So *that's* what Toy Story was about!

The highway of the future via Disney circa 1958

My favorite line: "A teletype panel shows up-to-the-minute traffic bulletins."

More flickr reprints on the way

I got a request from the folks at Mouse House News to use some of my Disney photos from last August. (They weren't specific as to which ones.) With appropriate credit I've given them the permission they've requested. The results will be shared when they arrive.

On presenting copyright

On Saturday I attended a training day for school media specialists. The three afternoon sessions were on Flickr & Blogging (presented by a co-worker of mine), Copyright (presented by someone I don't know) and Podcasting (presented by YT). I caught the end of the flickr presentation, sat through the whole copyright presentation and then did mine. At the request of a couple of folks who read my tweets during the copyright presentation, I've written this post.

Important note: I am not criticizing the presenter. Her presentation style was just fine and her information was accurate in the strictest sense. So please, do not view this a anything vaguely related to a comment on the presenter herself.

The first problem with presenting an issue such as copyright is the fact that it's a legal issue and the final arbiter of whether you're violating copyright lays with a judge or a jury after presenting a bucket-load of facts. Those situations generally require lawyers to sort out the details and several times the presenter reminded the audience "I am not a lawyer". This is not to say that she shouldn't present this topic. I've attended presentations on copyright with a panel of lawyers, and they couldn't do much better since many times the answer to a given scenario is "it depends".

Because of this, most copyright presenters will err on the side of caution, especially when presenting to people from schools as, after all, you don't want to do something that will get your school sued by a copyright holder. So, for example, the presenter mentioned this example from the flickr presentation in which the Westmont Public Library is using flickr to promote new materials. According to the presenter, before doing this, the library should "check the license" in the book to see if this "use" is allowed and, not finding such permission in the item, contact each of the publishers individually, get permission, file that permission away, and then proceed with photographing the item and posting it on flickr.

O.k. that might follow the letter of the law but I would hardly call that a realistic course of action. (In fact, School Library Journal would say that this falls under fair use.) Granted, that is the exactly the technically correct advice to give and I don't blame her for it. But such advice, in my opinion, needs to be tempered with a bit of reality. Maybe something along the lines of "this may, or may not, fall under fair use and be prepared to stop doing it should a publisher object." However, no such advice was given and I could tell that by the end of the hour, every school-media specialist in that room looked a bit more paranoid than they did at the beginning of the hour.

I am not trying to say that this is the fault of the presenter. She's presenting on copyright and therefore does not want (I assume) to run the risk of giving someone "bad advice" and getting in trouble for it later. That's natural. However, the fact that she's in the position she's in, shows just how screwed up the current copyright law is.

P.S. I will give the presenter kudos for pointing out that Mickey Mouse is the driving force behind copyright updating.

P.P.S. From NPR's Morning Edition today: Stanford Center Advocates for Fair Use on Web

Walt Disney's passport

l21269
Originally uploaded by Travelin' Librarian.

Yes folks, it's up for auction on eBay.

Disney's Tower of Terror

Having done this ride twice this past August I was a bit skeptical when I was told that someone had accurately recreated it in the game Half Life 2. Well, they did and I'm amazed.

Sushi

I've not had sushi since I moved to Lincoln. It's available, I've just not had the opportunity. These images reminded me of this.

The Disney Trap: How Copyright Steals our Stories

Vacation

I'm off to Orlando and won't be back 'till the 6^th of August. No laptop, no e-mail. I'll have my cell but that'll be left in the hotel room each day. I am taking the camera but won't be uploading the photos to flickr until I get back.

IL05: Wednesday Keynote

Google Print: Making the Virtual World Real

Rich Wiggins, Michigan State University

• Cartoon: Why Google must never be bought by Microsoft
• The idea: The library of congress metaphor
• Schoolgirl in Carthage, TN accessing the contents of LoC (Al Gore)
• Other projects
• Small group of items, digitize it all
• Words & songs of Woddie Guthrie
• Library of the first ladies
• Worthwhile
• Extends access to all web users
• Preserves fragile content
• Why not all of LoC?
• LoC numbers
• What are you measuring
• What resolution
• What color depth
• What format
• LoC books only
• 20-28 million itmes
• 2-7 million unqiqe bound volumes
• 17-20 terabytes
• The idea
• Disk is cheap
• Digital imaging is getting cheaper
• Broadband is relatively cheap
• Labor can be relatively cheap
• Automation can help
• The germ of the idea
• Technology is rapidly improving
• Flatbed scanner is the wrong tool
• Cost
• Aprox 0.05 or 0.01 per page/image
• $10-12/hour labor, mileage, meals, lodging
• Digitize the LoC
• Aprox $2.5 billion dollars
• OCR
• Getting better and faster
• Digitize it now, OCR on demand
• Storage costs are plummeting
• RAID arrays
• Under 50 cents per gigabyte
• Inventory/cataloging costs
• Physical shelf space, $40/item
• If it’s worth purchasing, it’s worth digitizing
• Barrier: Rights Management
• Once digitized, can we deliver it?
• The paradox of latent value
• Aprox 1/3 of LoC print collection is now in the public domain
• Barrier: “The benefit doesn’t justify the cost”
• It’s more cost effective to digitize everything than “just the good stuff”
• Encourages preservation
• Deacidification
• Fire, digital is backup
• Benefit: access
• Benefit: Improved digitizing technology
• The “ideal” book scanner
• Benefit: Standards
• Open XML
• Cross document metadata
• Benefits: Large-Scale Rights Management
• 20 million volume collection will force the issue of fair use
• Today, Disney defines fair use
• Digital library projects: Think Big!
• Google project teaches this
• Apollo Program Analogy
• Google’s vision will be realized by a forward thinking company and not the government
• Why trust Google
• They’re smart
• They’re agile and innovative
• They show no fear
• They’re worth $100 billion
• They won’t do this alone

Google: Catalyst for Digitization or Library Destruction?

Roy Tennant

Roy: More access is better. Easier access is better. There’s more room for players and that’s a good thing. It’s good that Google is digitizing things. There’s room for everyone to be involved.

• Cartoon: Google, Devil or Merely Evil?
• Scary monster #1: A Copyright Cataclysm
• Libraries have long enjoyed “fair use” protection
• Google’s attempt to shield themselves under fair use may ruin it for us all
• Scary monster #2: Closed Access to Open Material
• They’re probably going to fix this problem
• Google print copies are locked to certain ones from certain publishers
• Public domain books are locked into showing just a certain number of pages
• Link to buy book but no link to the library
• Scary monster #3: Blind Wholesale Digitization
• Large research collections are not weeded by policy
• “We keep all kinds of crap”
• Outdated material
• “no more a good thing than buying books based on color”
• Copyright will restrict access to up-to-date, recent material
• Users will end up with the old crap since it’s more available
• Open Content Alliance is focusing on collections
• Scary monster #4: Ads
• Most g]Google profit coming from ads
• Needs eyeballs
• Ads for antidepressants next to Hamlet
• Viagra next to Lolita
• They’re responsible to their stockholders, not the public
• Scary monster #5: Secrecy
• Agreements between Google and libraries have mostly been kept secret
• The libraries could not talk to each other
• U of Mich revealed after FOIA request
• OCA is more open
• Rumors indicate UM has best agreement from lib perspective, others have less favorable agreements
• But we don’t know, nobody’s talking
• Scary monster #6: Longevity
• Google, Enron, WorldCom in common?
• Public companies motivated by profit
• Two are now gone
• Size doesn’t not shield you
• What do Google and libraries have in common
• Both on Earth
• Harvard library, 400 years old
• Google 7 years old
• Who should we trust?

Adam Smith, Product Manager for Google Print and Google Scholar

• Welcome all comments, it’s what makes our products better
• Better to have the information out there to see how people use and access it
• Walk a difficult path to make many parties happy
• Want to make the information accessible – at least discoverable
• Copyright is an issue
• This is just a small piece of the puzzle as ambitious as this project sounds
• Welcome other efforts and they’re positive for the community
• Publisher program uses a destructive scanning technology
• Library version is non-destructive, they created it, and secret
• New version of Google privacy policy has just been released

Disney ownes Corman

Here's a match made in... Well, I'm just not sure where this match was made, but I'm guessing Hollywood...
Buena Vista Home Entertainment Acquires Rights to Extensive Roger Corman Library

Disney pulls michael moore's plug, but when

Yesterday Disney announced that it will not allow Mirimax to distribute Michael Moore's next film. Disney has responded that they told Moore of this decision more than a year ago and his bringing it up now is just a publicity stunt.