I agree with Nick Carr’s assessment of Lessig’s YouTube slam: it smells bad. Lessig uses very poor examples to back up a claim that “ever other major Web 2.0 company does expressly enable true sharing.”. He leaves out the big winners, who mostly have walled gardens around user generated content. And Lessig clearly has an agenda to destroy property rights and rebuild them in his image. That agenda is fine, but his arguments are weak and frankly this was a big fat softball for an eager Nick Carr to hit out of the park. Tim O’Reilly has a well thought out and less personal response to Lessig as well, suggesting that we’re still evolving and that YouTube was a pretty good evolution from the old days.
The market is ultimately going to decide the winners here, not Lessig, Carr or O’Reilly. I’m sure YouTube will look quaint a few years from now, but they offered a compelling product at the right time.
[...] with del.icio.us | Email this entry | TrackBack URI | Digg it | Track with co.mments | | Cosmos Click here forcopyright permissions! Copyright 2006 Mathew Ingram [...]
Even a complete idiot like Carr is bound by the law of probabilities to be right at least some of the time.
But please Mike, do not feed the trolls
Seriously though, if Lessigs’ example of Web 2.0 companies is bad, that what do you call Carr’s list of MySpace, Facebook, Craigslist, Digg and Google Web Search??
Even if you give him MySpace and Facebook (though they are borderline IMHO), Craigslist and Google Web Search are certainly not Web 2.0 (since bulletin boards and search engines have been around for over a decade).
And Digg? The one site he lists that is indisputably Web 2.0 does indeed have a CC-PD license on all user content. We’d therefore have to score that one in the Lessig column. Way to do your homework Carr.
Neither side has come across looking particularly good on this one I’m afraid.
[...] I Agree With Nick Carr? On the Lessig YouTube post… (tags: youtube lessig copyright) [...]
Cymbalta online….
Cymbalta online….