David, I agree that the idea of copyright is relevant, but also possibly
misleading insofar as we in the US have become accustomed to thinking of
copyright as a protection for intellectual property as an economic asset.
That's not the only (or perhaps even the original) function of copyright,
which also serves the function of protecting the INTEGRITY of expression,
including such things as your concern to preserve the signification of
authorship within specific discourse.
1. an example in use: I think you have a digitized copy of the slides from
Etienne Wenger's presentation to the Research on Math Ed SIG at AERA last
time we were in San Diego. Notice the copyright in the bottom corner of
each slide. Acrobat provides security settings to allow protection of the
integrity of the complete document.
2. another example with links on licensing options: See
If you go down to the links that explain licensing, the links lead to an
array of possibilities, which provide ways to preserve integrity without
I will prepare a different post on Presentation Media per se. I'm doing
relatively mindless scanning now while listening to the US Senate Floor
debate. So far the one speech that rose above the usual, IMHO, is one by
Carl Levin demolishing the argument that debate in the US Senate
"emboldens our enemies" and "demoralizes our troops."
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, David H Kirshner wrote:
> I think what links your musings about connectivity to my PowerPoint story
> is the shift from representational media to presentational media. The
> PowerPoint medium is obviously presentational. But what's subtly changing
> is the gradual drift of other media from representational to
> presentational. For instance, what could be more representational than a
> picture, except that with new technologies these static representations can
> be enjoined by the original creator, or by subsequent participants to
> become something else. The key, of course, is digitalization. The analog
> medium of pictures is static. The digitalization of the picture enables it
> to participate in subsequent performance, hence it loses it's place in
> time, and with that it's originary vectors, such as its owner.
> "Michael Glassman"
> <MGlassman who-is-at ehe.ohio To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
> -state.edu> <email@example.com>
> Sent by: cc: (bcc: David H Kirshner/dkirsh/LSU)
> xmca-bounces who-is-at weber. Subject: RE: [xmca] Subtleties of Presentation Media
> 02/16/2007 05:17 PM
> Please respond to
> "eXtended Mind,
> Culture, Activity"
> What an interesting story. I have been doing some reading and thinking on
> connectivity lately and have come to the conclusion that three little
> letters - www - are going to change our universe in ways that we can't
> imagine. One of the ways I believe it is going to change things is by
> changing the concept of boundaries, and the notion that ideas can somehow
> can be treated as property. That's right - I think there is a real
> possibility that intellectual property will become a thing of the past. Is
> this a good thing or a bad thing. It's hard to say, but I think it is
> coming. Industries that live on intellectual property rights - like
> recording, publishing, entertainment - are fighting like mad, but I'm not
> sure they will be able to do anything to stop the wave.
> So getting back to your particular scenario. What would have been the
> difference if the TA found your Power Point presentation on the internet,
> and downloaded it, or better yet hyperlinked it (so many of my students
> bring their portables to class - and at Cornell my nephew had to buy one as
> a freshman). And then some of those students thought there was something
> interesting and hyperlinked it to some people they know. Unless you had a
> trackback function, you wouldn't even know where it was going or who was
> using it. People would change it, people would add to it, people would
> desecrate it. But every person using the idea would be equal because what
> was important were the ideas that you created and they took on a life of
> their own. Perhaps the slides would come back to you in a form you didn't
> even recognize. But it wouldn't matter because you connected with all of
> these people - your ideas became viral rather than remaining hierarchical.
> The only thing that creates boundaries on the ideas is rationality. Of
> cours there may be a really dark side to this whole phenomenon, there
> always is. But like I said, I'm thinkng we need to redefine our ideas of
> boundaries and ownership.
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org on behalf of David H Kirshner
> Sent: Fri 2/16/2007 11:07 AM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: [xmca] Subtleties of Presentation Media
> A few days ago I gave a PowerPoint presentation of my research to our
> department. After the presentation, a graduate teaching assistant in the
> department whom I've known for a number of years asked me if he could have
> a copy of the presentation so that he could follow-up with one of his
> classes (some of his students also were at the presentation). I immediately
> agreed, but after some debate with myself, I decided to give him hard copy
> of the slides instead. The medium of PowerPoint would erode the boundaries
> between him and me.
> Here's a snippet from my note to him. I wonder if this phenomenon has been
> observed/discussed before in the media literature.
> Comments welcome.
> David Kirshner
> Hi xxxx,
> I've copied out all of my slides (about 50), and left them in your mailbox.
> I'd intended to send you the PowerPoint presentation itself, but in the end
> felt uncomfortable about doing that.
> It's an interesting media phenomenon. If I give you photocopies of the
> slides and you distribute them for discussion to your students, it's very
> clear what are the boundaries between my contribution, and yours. The
> slides are mine, the discussion is yours. However, the PowerPoint medium is
> inherently incomplete. If you present my slides as a PowerPoint
> presentation, it no longer is possible to clearly demarcate our boundaries.
> That's because the in the PowerPoint setting, the slides are inseparable
> from the commentary. Thus it's not possible to distinguish what part of the
> commentary is you and what part is me.
> xmca mailing list
> (See attached file: winmail.dat)
> xmca mailing list
UD School of Education
NEWARK DE 19716
"those who fail to reread
are obliged to read the same story everywhere"
-- Roland Barthes, S/Z (1970)
xmca mailing list
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 01 2007 - 10:36:50 PST