Could The Ultimate Legacy Organization – The Vatican – Be Out In Front On Copyright?
from the all-rites-reserved dept
A recent blogger meet up hosted by the Vatican received some attention for comments with which Techdirt readers would be familiar on copyright, attribution, and new media business models. For example, Italian blogger and author Mattia Marasco highlighted the importance of attribution, but said that copyright is “an old model,” when it comes to new media, and Dutch podcaster Father Roderick Vonhogen said that journalists will have to get used to their material being reused, but those who focus on quality will make it. The ideas are nothing new (and just some of many expressed at the event), but it’ll be interesting to see if the Vatican is listening. Marasco and Father Roderick are not Vatican officials, though in recent years the Pope and other Vatican officials have expressed concern over “an unduly rigid assertion of the right to intellectual property.” (The Holy See has, however, asserted its own right to protect the figure of the Pope, but it’s unclear what exactly that means.) The Vatican also announced an upcoming News.va website, which will make extensive use of social media and apparently use a non-commercial Creative Commons license (according to Father Roderick [33:40]). Not bad for a 2000-year-old institution. There was also a call for the Holy See Press Office to consider bloggers, when releasing advanced copies of Vatican documents. The meeting was intended to open a dialogue between bloggers and the Vatican, so it’ll be interesting to see what the Vatican takes to heart from the encounter and how they continue down the new media path.
Comments on “Could The Ultimate Legacy Organization – The Vatican – Be Out In Front On Copyright?”
Expect them to pull an Obama and change their tune at the last minute. 🙂
Zounds! I thought Roderick 33:40 was the part that said “All characters appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.”
pope's image is 'protected'?
How much more damage could be done to it that actual popes haven’t already done?
While I praise the use of creative commons I cannot find it in me to like the organization that would shield a molester becuase he happens to be the pope.
Re: pope's image is 'protected'?
Durr, I meant priests were shielded and the pope is said to have covered it up. Was counfused becuase past popes were known to go after young boys. “Keeper of the pope’s monkey” is a very important job indeed.
Cue Hollywood attempt to lobby the Representative of God* and resultant Wrath of said God in 5, 4, 3…
2000 year old institution
will make extensive use of social media and apparently use a non-commercial Creative Commons license (according to Father Roderick [33:40]). Not bad for a 2000-year-old institution.
Of course it is exactly what you would expect – you don’t get to be a 2000 year old institution if you don’t recognise which way the wind is blowing and act accordingly.
2000 Year Copy Maximalists
Actually, they haven’t been around for 2000 years. Their “religion” was officially legalized in 313 AD. Before that, they were just another religion. And yes, they DID enforce their “copyright” of the various and unorganized holy writs through the non-education of the masses, until the Gutenberg Press came around. That’s the “True Power” of the word I guess.
Which brings up a prayer for the greedy (And yes, the Catholics are the ultimate since they plundered this planet and have MANY treasures stored in their archives because people aren’t “qualified” to see such “evilness” as arbitrarily deemed them, because we all KNOW that they are QUALIFIED to judge what is and IS NOT “evil”):
Our father who copyrighteth all
Hallowed by thy trademark
Thy Kingdom legally enforced
Thy will be judged on earth as in the Holy court
For the Kingdom, the Power, and the corporate image
Are (y)Ours now and forever and ever and ever…..more
Enjoy this. And maybe one day they’ll see the error of their ways and return their ill-gotten historical bounty to where it came from.
Re: 2000 Year Copy Maximalists
Actually, what happened with the Gutenberg Press is exactly why I would expect the church to be out in front on this. Christianity exploded after people were able to get their hands on a cheap copy of the Bible. The more freely the knowledge is shared, the more it’s shared. And one could continue to say the more it’s shared, the more people are guilt tripped into giving the church money (I’m sure there’s a lot of good church goers out there and I’ve just been jaded by the bad ones).
As for the other evils that come from the revised Bible, let’s leave that for another day.
Re: 2000 Year Copy Maximalists
Speaking only for myself, I hate the catholics no more than I hate any organisation that would force educational abuse on children with threats of eternal torture on the one hand, while covering up almost systemic levels of sexual abuse and defending the abusers on the other.
Naive, indirect and thinly spread it may be, every catholic that doesn’t speak out against it carries that guilt in my book.
If you’re not the type to hide from naughty language, you can see the perfect summation of my feelings for catholicism in Tim Minchin’s Pope Song… popular song, that.
Re: 2000 Year Copy Maximalists
By your logic marijuana doesn’t exist. Just because something illegal does mean it doesn’t exist. To say otherwise is not different then saying everyone follows the law.
Re: Re: 2000 Year Copy Maximalists
Yup, you’re right. Marijuana doesn’t exist.
Just like utopia doesn’t exist.
And double-negatives only equal a positive (except in Spanish where “Yo no s? nada” is still negatively connotated).
Sorry my logic offends you. But I don’t know where you made the logic jump to MJ not existing.
Wow, lots of Catholic hate in here.
I’m sure you guys are aware, but one of the fundamental tenets of catholicism is that people are pretty messed up, but there’s hope for improvement.
They definitely mess up. Remember that one bishop who killed Joan of Arc for heresy, only for the pope to step in an make her a saint. (This story may be something I saw in a movie and not 100% historically accurate.)
They have problems today, and they are serious problems. But they are trying to improve. And that’s more than can be said for so many institutions and organizations.
So why do we hate on them? Can you imagine the RIAA admitting that exerting corrupt and purchased influence was morally unjustifiable and then trying to stop it.
/How does anyone know about the treasure archive if no one is allowed to see it? Dan Brown?
See, this I can get behind; that the Vatican has seen that it may be able to educate people.
Does this mean Portugal will not recognize the CC licenses and thus deem the Vatican licenses illegal? 😛
Hey, maybe they’ll make Mike Masnick a saint! Quick Mike, delete all the porn off your hard drive!
Oh, yeah, they’re Catholics. Nevermind…