Revision as of 00:12, 12 August 2016 by Eloquence (talk | contribs) (Eloquence moved page 2005-02-02 to Archive:2005-02-02)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search


Open access

What should we do with each of these?

Orphan works RFC

  • What text should we add to the orphaned works page?
    • Sarah Brown (who just left Public Knowledge) said, "Just instruct people to tell actual stories, things that happened if they can." -- Nelson 23:34, 2 Feb 2005 (EST)
  • How much, or how little, do we want to put on the page in the way of suggestions, what we think people should say, or why it's important to comment?
  • Should we propose an "official" FC.o solution?
    • There is a potential orphaned works project at HLS that we're interested in pursuing. We should chat about this. -- elizabeth

Video project

  • Should we start a mailing list for the video project?
  • Do we have guidelines?
  • What needs to be done?


  • Should we start including the attenance in the minutes?
    • Yes please, it's nice to know who wasn't there so you can update them later if they needed to hear something important. -- Nelson 22:54, 2 Feb 2005 (EST)
  • Should we post agendas to meetings on the wiki before the meeting?
    • Yes, this is great. We can even edit the agenda if something is missing. It beats me and Gavin inventing it all and springing it on people at the meeting. -- Nelson 22:54, 2 Feb 2005 (EST)
    • Should they be on the same page as the minutes, or a different page, so we can compare afterwards?
      • I've always thought that each date should have just one page, with sub-sections. But I don't really care. The agenda and minutes should clearly be kept separate, whether on the same page or two different pages. -- Nelson 22:54, 2 Feb 2005 (EST)
  • No more than one call a week?
    • We currently have too many calls. It's asking too much of FC.o'ers, and we don't gain much by having them all. Your call whether we keep the Sunday or Wednesday call, but they will become more of an invite-only system. -- Gavin
      • yes. 2 calls a week is 1 too many, especially since not that much gets done between calls (especially me anyways. i get most work done just before calls, if any), and friday nights meetings, well, its friday night! =) my vote: sunday calls. -- Ben Li
      • yes. i often have conflicts with wed night calls, but it would be nice not to have sun calls too early! -- elizabeth
      • I, too, like Sunday afternoon. -- Gavin
      • Sunday afternoon seems fine to me. I just worry that if someone misses the one call for the week, they don't have a second call they can make it up on, they have to wait an entire week. Also, what if we get religious people who have church on Sunday and happen to live on the West Coast or something, which would make our conference calls at 11am PST difficult for them. Having multiple calls allows them to still participate if they can't make that one time. -- Nelson 22:54, 2 Feb 2005 (EST)
  • Office hours only when needed?
    • Not as a regular thing. In fact, we're not even convinced that office hours work at all. But we'll only schedule them as needed, and they won't be on Friday nights anymore. -- Gavin


  • Postpone the DRM campaign?
    • We just don't have the resources to take this on this semester. -- Gavin
    • Please excuse my ignorance, but what were we looking to pursue in the DRM campaign? -- elizabeth

Role of FC.o

FC.o should shift from a Web-based, command-and-control model to a chapter-based, participatory model. The role of FC.o should be primarily to facilitate the forming of new chapters, the expansion and improvement of current chapters, and collaboration between chapters. The Core is there to decide how they can help chapters, not to decide what to ask chapters to help with. e.g. If there is a need for it, FC.o should produce educational / propaganda material on X subject; FC.o should not ask or tell chapters to do or participate in a campaign on X subject. Action should come from the chapters and individual members, from the bottom up. This would be a gradual shift, probably extending over the length of the semester or longer. -- Gavin

  • Unfortunately, due to the nature of a lot of the issues and campaigns surrounding the free culture movement, I'm not sure if it is the best idea to leave all of the campaigns for the chapters themselves to develop. This is not to say that the chapters may not develop their own individual campaigns, but there is a need for guidance from the national organization regarding the direction and the goals of the chapters. In addition, many chapters may not have the time nor the expertise to develop extensive campaigns of their own. -- elizabeth

Core team

  • Exactly what is the Core? What should it be?
  • Who is it? Who should it be?
  • How does it operate? How should it operate?
  • What power do it, and its members, have? What power should they have?


Neeru of CC says

I thought I'd maybe ask you about this. We thought given the nature of the current legal climate, that it would be great to get as much CC licensed music (and other stuff I suppose), on the P2P networks. However, I think this would require a large group of people being involved, sharing and trading stuff on the networks. Already, there's tons of stuff that's licensed and properly tagged at, that you could actually search for within Morpheus.

This seems like it could be a great project for members of the Free Culture Movement. What do you think? We'd love to help organize something.

Nelson says

What do you think? Partnering with CC to put CC stuff on filesharing networks? In a public fashion? This is something we've talked about a lot in the past, as part of the "C3 campaign" but never acted on.

... and just to demonstrate that, yes, Gavin and I did just talk about not doing giant national campaigns, at least for the near future...

Perhaps we can still do national projects that are organized by other organizations, such as Creative Commons. Then we can get national press for local efforts.

E.g. for this CC campaign, we don't make a website or anything, let CC do it. People just put CC songs on their filesharing networks, then tell the press about it, both local and national.

Free media coverage, no standalone site we have to worry about, we just make FC.o look nice and draw attention to our local chapters.

We don't have to say, "alright, troops, everyone get in line and do this!" It can just be a suggestion that people can pick up at their chapters if they want to, and if enough people do, it has the effect of a national campaign anyway.

How about that?

Reblaw Conference

Nelson will be speaking on a panel.

  • Prepare pamphlets in time for conference.
  • Find out about getting a table or another opportunity to give out FC literature.

This is a great opportunity to pitch the organization to progressive law students who would potentially be interested in getting involved.

  • I will attempt to spearhead the recruitment efforts. -- elizabeth


Minutes for Wednesday core call on February 2, 2005 by Nicholas.

In attendance: Amanda, Eric, Nelson, Gavin, Nick, Elizabeth, Andy, Ben Li


  • where are we?
  • Who's in charge? Mike or Jeremy?
  • What's going on with the story board?
  • Need framework for clubs?
  • Still shooting for getting footage to Jeremy/Mike by Feb. 13.
  • When sending clips, include info about local campus (see video page)
  • February 25 deadline for editing (day of Colin's first performance)

Creative Commons P2P idea

  • not much work required
  • need press releases
  • need to make a blog post announcing initiative
  • Link to Wired CD, CC Copy Me/Remix Me
  • Stuff from Open CD (see thread on Discuss list) Undead Art entries,
  • Prodigem/Morpheus

Orphan works RFC

  • we still need text (need to make sure people are aware they don't have to hit all questions asked by the copyright office; why it's important, help others see how it affects them; we need to break it down for people).
  • link to other resources on orphaned works (
  • Amanda and Gavin will work on the text
  • Elizabeth will try to get in contact with professors who really know the subject
    • It would probably be a good idea to develop a FAQ to give people a brief overview and tell them why this is important, why they should care.
  • there was discussion of offering canned comments
    • is volume or diversity better?
    • should we just get suggestions and ideas?
    • we need more information; we need to talk to PK or someone who has experience with this. Nelson will ask PK.
  • tell the copyright office to adopt orphans, find parents for these orphans, etc.
  • DEADLINE/GOAL: Go live on Monday, announce with press releases.
    • We should also try to make sure that the multiple sites covering this issue (i.e., lessig) have a link to our form once it goes live.


  • From now on, we'll include meeting attendance in the meeting minutes
  • We'll also post agendas to the wiki before meetings
  • Ideally, the agenda will be at least partially set during the previous meeting
  • One call a week, Sundays at 3PM.
  • We'll have ad hoc calls for individual projects throughout the week
  • Office hours ONLY when needed.
  • If you can't make a call you should post to the Wiki.

The wiki:

  • The wiki is a forum
  • Be bold!


  • What can we actually do?
  • Could this be worked into the CC campaign?
  • Can we get something off the ground in the next few months that is not too labor intensive and that people will understand?
  • Should we stick to the broadcast flag or shift the focus DRM in general (which might be more applicable to the general public)?
  • Could this have some connection with EFF's "Endangered Gadgets"?
  • We simply can't do this campaign in Feb.
  • DECISION: Revisit at first call in March.

Open access

We continued to discuss which groups/orgs we should try to get our schools to sign onto and/or sign onto ourselves.

  • Alliance for Taxpayer Access
    • We will continue with our prior plans: get your school to sign onto this.
    • Andy will continue trying to contact them to sign us on as FC.o.
  • Library-Related Principles for the International Development Agenda of WIPO
    • This is for library associations, so we're not taking any action here.
    • RMS has some criticisms of this, which are mostly valid.
      • It's not meant to be statutory language, though, and it's still a step forward.
      • However, as this moves forward, we'll move forward in parallel, letting people know our concerns (blog?)
  • Everyone should read and consider:

General purpose pamphlet

  • We want to get an editable version of the NYU flier ASAP (so Nelson and Elizabeth can use it at the Yale conference coming up later this month)

Next meeting

Meeting minutes and logs

2005-01-02 · 2005-01-03 · 2005-01-04 · 2005-01-06 · 2005-01-08 · 2005-01-12 · 2005-01-16 · 2005-01-19 · 2005-01-22 · 2005-01-23 · 2005-01-25 · 2005-01-26 · 2005-01-28 · 2005-01-30 · 2005-01-31 · 2005-02-02 · 2005-02-06 · 2005-02-13 · 2005-02-20 · 2005-02-27 · 2005-03-02 · 2005-03-06 · 2005-03-13 · 2005-03-16 · 2005-03-20 · 2005-03-23 · 2005-03-27 · 2005-03-30 · 2005-04-03 · 2005-04-10 · 2005-04-17 · 2005-04-24 · 2005-05-01 · 2005-05-08 · 2005-05-15 · 2005-05-22 · 2005-05-29 · 2005-06-01 · 2005-06-05 · 2005-06-06 · 2005-06-10 · 2005-06-12 · 2005-06-15 · 2005-06-15/Chatlog · 2005-06-19 · 2005-06-26 · 2005-07-03 · 2005-07-10 · 2005-07-17 · 2005-07-24 · 2005-07-31 · 2005-08-01 · 2005-08-07 · 2005-08-14 · 2005-08-17 · 2005-08-21 · 2005-08-28 · 2005-09-04 · 2005-09-11 · 2005-09-18 · 2005-09-24 · 2005-10-02 · 2005-10-09 · 2005-10-16 · 2005-10-23 · 2005-10-30 · 2005-11-06 · 2005-11-13 · 2005-11-16 · 2005-11-20 · 2005-11-27 · 2005-12-04 · 2005-12-11 · 2005-12-14 · 2005-12-18 · 2005-12-18 board meeting · 2005-12-21 · 2005-12-21 board meeting · 2005-12-23 board meeting · 2005-12-27 board meeting · 2006-01-01 · 2006-01-02 · 2006-01-07 · 2006-01-09 · 2006-01-22 · 2006-01-25 · 2006-02-12 · 2006-02-13 · 2006-03-02 · 2006-03-15 · 2006-03-22 · 2006-03-26 · 2006-03-29 · 2006-04-02 · 2006-04-09 · 2006-04-26 · 2006-05-07 · 2006-05-12 · 2006-05-14 · 2006-05-17 · 2006-08-16 · 2006-09-13 · 2006-09-17 · 2006-09-17/raw log · 2006-09-20 · 2006-09-20/raw log · 2006-09-27 · 2006-10-18 · 2006-10-18/transcript · 2006-10-25 · 2006-11-01 · 2006-11-08 · 2006-12-06 · 2006-12-06/Log · 2007-01-17 · 2007-01-21 · 2007-01-24 · 2007-02-07 · 2007-02-28 · 2007-02-28/Log · 2007-03-08 · 2007-03-21 · 2007-05-25 · 2007-06-29 · 2007-07-15 · 2007-07-15/log · 2007-07-17 · 2007-07-17/log · 2007-07-22 · 2007-07-22/log · 2007-07-29 · 2007-07-29/log · 2007-08-01 · 2007-08-05 · 2007-08-05/log · 2007-08-07 · 2007-08-07/log · 2007-08-08 · 2007-08-08/log · 2007-08-12 · 2007-08-12/log/bylaws · 2007-08-12/log/tools · 2007-08-14 · 2007-08-14/log · 2007-08-16 · 2007-08-16/log · 2007-09-03 · 2007-09-03/log · 2007-09-05 · 2007-09-05/log · 2007-09-09 · 2007-09-20 · 2007-10-07