Week 8

What a wonderful presentation Mr. Rosling gave!  He had my undivided attention the entire time.  I really enjoyed it when his data starting moving while he was talking about it.  The way he interacted with it was genius.  His knowledge of the subject matter and use of the tools available in Power Point were obvious.  He appeared comfortable and managed them well.

I think the key elements of his technique were the ability to keep the story going, interacting physically with the animated data, and his vocal inflection while talking about it.  All of these things combined gave him a decided edge in keeping the audience's attention.

I will always remember this presentation.  When doing one myself, I hope to make it interesting to my audience like he did.

Week 7

In the article by the NY Times, I think the statement made by Roy Blount, Jr., president of the Author's Guild, "that authors have a right to a fair share of the value that audio adds to Kindle 2’s version of books" is just another example of yet another way to initiate a frivolous lawsuit. Amazon is merely integrating new technology into a device that is helpful for people and it has nothing to do with the intellectual property. None of the work is being affected. No words are being changed, and the story lines are still intact.

I agree more with Wendy Seltzer, in the Wired article by David Kravetz who said "no rights are being violated. Amazon’s newest gadget, she said, "is enabling another feature to make further lawful uses of that book."  I further agree that it is yet another step in making written materials more accessible to the blind and visually impaired. 

More recently, in a lawsuit that was won by the HathiTrust digitization project, accessibilty appears to be the key point.  “For the first time ever, blind students and scholars will have the opportunity to participate equally in library research,” NFB president Marc Maurer said. “The blind, just like the sighted, will have a world of education and information at their fingertips."   The article I read about this is located HERE.

Week 6

     Fairey claims he did not remix the image for profit.  Nor did he use the entire image, as I did here with my "Mirror, mirror, on the wall" image.  The fact that his creation did earn a profit, and ultimately led to monetary gain, is not a clear indicator he violated "fair use".  He did not design it with the intention of marketing it for profit, but since it did become a marketable image that brought profit to his companies, I think there should have, at the very least, been some sort of credit given to the photographer and the Associated Press for the original image. 

     After reading all of the suggested articles, I don't recall there being any mention of a Creative Commons license on the photo, nor do I recall there being any mention of the orginal photograph being connecteed to any kind of phrase or wording that stated it could not be used.  Had he mentioned the photographer and/or AP, then I think Creative Commons would apply. 

     I viewed the plagiarism videos (YouTube, Paul Robeson) but I'm not sure that applies here.  It's difficult deciding which laws apply...there are SO many! 
     
     Street art can be very inspiring.  I grew up in a big city and have seen some really beautiful "graffiti".  It always made me wonder if any of the people who created it ever did anything artful with their lives.  This form of expression is more important that people realize, I think, and they deserve credit for their work just like any other artist.  Someone should work with these people and help them copyright their works for added protection. 

     Did you know that every street artist signs his work?  That's how police figure out who did what "graffiti".  I learned this from watching the news years ago, so to cite the exact newscast at this point in time is not possible.  Here is a link to a really cool site that plays host to street artists.  While most of it appears to be orginal art, I think you will recognize some of the artwork as pure plagiarism as it is described in the YouTube videos we watched this week.  It is unknown to me if any of these artists got permission to use some of the images they have painted.  I have never seen a citation on any of these types of images or phrases, so I hightly doubt it.  It's a great site to peruse, nonetheless, so enjoy!  

Week 5

The world of digital images is amazing to me. I love taking pictures, uploading them to my computer, and manipulating them to make them look their best. Being able to create and print a quality photo and putting it into a frame for display is a very gratifying experience for me.

I like to use my digital camera. I have an Olympus SP-550UZ. The specs are: 7.1 megapixels, 18x optical zoom, 28mm lens, image stabilization and shoots at 15fps. It takes real nice closeups. I love taking pictures of insects and plants and enhancing them. It's a fun hobby that I spend many hours doing!

As far as drawing goes, I'm not that talented. I appreciate the artwork of David Lanier. It's a pretty incredible addition to the world of drawing and painting. My favorite work is the picture he drew of the staple puller. I related to it immediately because it is something I use in my work every day. I love that he described it as being "ferocious", but obviously don't agree with the term "useless".