Speaker 1: Brought to you by the reinvented two thousand twelve Cammeray,
Speaker 1: It's ready. Are you get in touch with technologies? With
Speaker 1: tech Stuff from how stuff looks dot com. Hello everybody,
Speaker 1: and welcome to tech Stuff. My name is Chris Poulette,
Speaker 1: and I'm an editor here at how stuff works dot com.
Speaker 1: Sitting across from me again as usual, is senior writer
Speaker 1: Jonathan Strickland. Hi, and I just like to thank all
Speaker 1: the people who downloaded and or streamed this podcast. Excellent.
Speaker 1: That's very nice of you. Yes, I'd also like to
Speaker 1: thank our guest producer, Matt Frederick, amazing musician, member of
Speaker 1: Lines and Scissors. Matt, and I know you would do
Speaker 1: nothing to ever interrupt us in our podcast, isn't that true?
Speaker 1: Matt's nodding yes. And you finished the Beatles rock band
Speaker 1: in one day. He did finish the Beatles rock band
Speaker 1: in one day. He played the drums on expert all
Speaker 1: the way through. Excellent. Yeah, alright, so uh at atually,
Speaker 1: you know, the Beatles were We're recently rumored to be
Speaker 1: coming to iTunes store and and they didn't. And actually
Speaker 1: they've they've they've been people have been waiting for this
Speaker 1: to happen, and there's a reason why they haven't come
Speaker 1: out yet with the digital versions of their songs. What
Speaker 1: would that be, That would be copyright copyright, Now here's
Speaker 1: a sticky situation. Now. Of course, copyright does not just
Speaker 1: fallen under the realm of tech stuff. Technically, many of
Speaker 1: our our sister podcasts could cover this topic. But copyright
Speaker 1: does hold a special place within the field of technology
Speaker 1: because things like the Internet have made it very easy
Speaker 1: to distribute information on a scale much larger than what
Speaker 1: could be achieved on one zone previously. Correct. Oh yes,
Speaker 1: I mean the idea of copyright goes back a very
Speaker 1: very long time. And uh it was only recently really
Speaker 1: in the twentie and or you know, twenty first centuries
Speaker 1: that copyright has been extended to amazing links. I mean,
Speaker 1: in the United States, the current length of copyright is
Speaker 1: the death of the author plus seventy years, right, and
Speaker 1: if it's an anonymous work or pseudo anonymous work, work
Speaker 1: for higher these works go ninety five years from the
Speaker 1: year of its publication, so you know, when you can't
Speaker 1: necessarily identify the author years from when it was published.
Speaker 1: That's a long time. And there are various organizations that
Speaker 1: are responsible really for pushing copyright to these extremes. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and really it's it's not In most cases, it's not
Speaker 1: the author and it's not like the government is concerned
Speaker 1: about it. It's more like the publisher. Yeah, or giant corporations. Well, yeah,
Speaker 1: I can think of one in particular. Yes, I know you. Actually,
Speaker 1: the the corporation I think you're thinking of is generally
Speaker 1: given credit for I just won't say it's a Mickey
Speaker 1: mouse operation. Yeah. Okay, So but copyright it does, it
Speaker 1: does h cover, It protects works for a very long time.
Speaker 1: And what does it protect it from, you might ask, Well,
Speaker 1: I mean people want to uh, they come up with
Speaker 1: these neat ideas, and they're able to sell lots and
Speaker 1: lots of copies of these ideas to other people who
Speaker 1: want to read about them or watch them or listen
Speaker 1: to them. Um. And and that's understandable. But it's those
Speaker 1: people who um want to share those with other people
Speaker 1: and maybe not you know, paid. Right. So well, let's
Speaker 1: let's use a specific example because this is getting kind
Speaker 1: of vague. So let's say that you've published a book
Speaker 1: and you've called the book, uh, the heaving bosom So
Speaker 1: you've got The Heaving Bosom. It's your it's your Bodice
Speaker 1: ripper romance novel, and you're really excited about it. Okay, Um,
Speaker 1: so you've you've gone and you've published it. And then
Speaker 1: someone comes out with a book called The Heaving Boobs.
Speaker 1: What you're coming up with? This? How AT's saying? How
Speaker 1: about keeping abreast of the situation? So they come up
Speaker 1: with a book called Keeping Abreast of the Situation? And
Speaker 1: Chris has actually left the room. Do you want to
Speaker 1: go back? And we're gonna keep going, all right? Cool?
Speaker 1: Keeping a breast of the situation. And it turns out
Speaker 1: that the book is word for word the same as
Speaker 1: The Heaving Bosom. Now this would be a problem obviously,
Speaker 1: because you, as the author of The Heaving Bosom, you
Speaker 1: are do the the rewards that come as a result
Speaker 1: of selling this work. Yes, And what's really irritating is
Speaker 1: that book is two dollars cheaper than my book and
Speaker 1: is out selling it now that it's cheaper because someone
Speaker 1: else can get the same content for less, right, So uh, now,
Speaker 1: what copyright does it gives the person who published the
Speaker 1: book originally? In this case, you who have published The
Speaker 1: Heaving Bosom a legal recourse too to pursue a claim
Speaker 1: against someone who has violated that copyright. And so you
Speaker 1: can protect your intellectual property so that it remains yours
Speaker 1: and uh, and that way it prevents other people from
Speaker 1: capitalizing on your work, and then you know you wouldn't
Speaker 1: see anything from that, right, I mean, that's that's the
Speaker 1: whole basis of copyright. It's not a bad thing on
Speaker 1: its own. In fact, it's very important. Anyone who's a
Speaker 1: creator wants to be able to protect his or her
Speaker 1: own work, at least to some extent. Now, copyright that
Speaker 1: that takes effect as soon as you create something, Yes,
Speaker 1: as soon as it is fixed a fixed work. You
Speaker 1: do not have to send a form into the federal government,
Speaker 1: although you can. That's that's registering your copyright. Yeah, you know,
Speaker 1: you don't have to register a copyright to hold a copyright,
Speaker 1: right if you if you write a blog post and
Speaker 1: hit the published button, that's copyright you. Yeah, the same
Speaker 1: thing for any kind of written work, musical work, any
Speaker 1: any sort of recorded work, even an image, you can copyright. So, uh,
Speaker 1: anything that you produce creatively, assuming that that's created through
Speaker 1: your own work. It's not something that's derived from something else,
Speaker 1: you hold the copyright to it. Yes, Now, not everyone
Speaker 1: agrees with these rules. I mean some people are a
Speaker 1: little bit more lenient. Some people say, hey, you know,
Speaker 1: I created this song and I want to share it
Speaker 1: with all my friends on the internet and wanted you
Speaker 1: to remix it and cut it up and do whatever
Speaker 1: you want to with it. And I want to hear
Speaker 1: what you what you do with it, and so what
Speaker 1: do you do in that case? I mean, that's not
Speaker 1: covered in the in the you know US code, right,
Speaker 1: copyright law doesn't doesn't cover for this. It's it's very inflexible.
Speaker 1: I mean, things are under copyright and you're either violating
Speaker 1: it or you're not. And it's getting more inflexible, right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: even things like fair use. People bring up the concept
Speaker 1: of fair use. Fair use is incredibly difficult to prove. Yeah,
Speaker 1: fair use is um fair use is a very contingent
Speaker 1: situation for it's it's so hard to define. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: mean the thing is with fair use, you are allowed
Speaker 1: to use some of something and something else. Like for example,
Speaker 1: say you're writing a book, a nonfiction book, and you
Speaker 1: would like to put a a quote from someone else's
Speaker 1: book in there. Well, you're allowed to do that, but
Speaker 1: the thing is it has to be of a certain
Speaker 1: layng and it has to be what they call transformative,
Speaker 1: which means, you know, if you want to put half
Speaker 1: a paragraph of somebody's book in to illustrate your point
Speaker 1: and illustrated as Hey, this is something that Mr Smith
Speaker 1: wrote about and I think it's an incredibly important thing,
Speaker 1: and you said it off as a quote. You're probably
Speaker 1: not going to get sued for that. Now, if you,
Speaker 1: you know, lift the entire paragraph and don't change a word,
Speaker 1: then that's not you're not really transforming in anyway. You're
Speaker 1: you know, and that's that's actually what the transformative part
Speaker 1: is what gives the right to people like weird Al
Speaker 1: who want to do a parody. He often takes pretty
Speaker 1: much the same song, maybe changes it into a different key,
Speaker 1: and then adds new words to it. Well, he's transformed
Speaker 1: it into a new song by doing that, So technically
Speaker 1: he would not have to ask permission, although we should
Speaker 1: point out that he does. Yes, he always does. He
Speaker 1: does ask permission though technically under the rules of fair
Speaker 1: use he doesn't have to, but he he takes that
Speaker 1: extra step, So good on you. Weird. Al Yeah. Now,
Speaker 1: specifically Section one oh seven of the Copyright Code, uh
Speaker 1: it stay that it sets out four factors to be
Speaker 1: considered and determining determining whether or not a particular use
Speaker 1: is fair. And here are the four things. The purpose
Speaker 1: and character of the use, including whether such uses of
Speaker 1: commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes. Nonprofit is
Speaker 1: generally considered better if you're trying to argue fair use.
Speaker 1: The nature of the copyrighted work, the amount and substantiality
Speaker 1: of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work
Speaker 1: as a whole, So how much you create on your
Speaker 1: own and how much you actually cite from other works,
Speaker 1: and the effect of the use upon the potential market
Speaker 1: for or value of the copyrighted work. In other words, yeah,
Speaker 1: In other words, if if if you include this in
Speaker 1: your work and somehow that impacts the sales of the
Speaker 1: original work, that's a bad thing. That's say, are Unless
Speaker 1: it impacts it in a positive way, like it makes
Speaker 1: people go out and buy some other book, that's okay.
Speaker 1: But if you if people say, hey, I don't need
Speaker 1: to buy the original book because I can get enough
Speaker 1: of it out of this system here, that's bad. And
Speaker 1: um uh. And again, you know Paulett was talking earlier
Speaker 1: about you know, you don't if you get to a
Speaker 1: certain length a certain amount of material that might violate
Speaker 1: fair use. Here's another problem. That length is not defined. Nope,
Speaker 1: there is no definition to how many words you can
Speaker 1: use or how much, how even a percentage of the
Speaker 1: content that you can use before you violate fair use.
Speaker 1: It's a case by case basis. Yep. And that's a
Speaker 1: that's a problem because it's going to be up to
Speaker 1: a judge to decide this. I mean, you know, if
Speaker 1: you if you write a two hundred and sixty three
Speaker 1: page book and you use a paragraph out of somebody's work,
Speaker 1: that's really not that substantial all things considered. Of course,
Speaker 1: your lawyer is going to have to prove that. However,
Speaker 1: if you write a half page long poem and two
Speaker 1: thirds of it is somebody else's that's really an awful
Speaker 1: lot of it. Yeah. So let's but let's say that
Speaker 1: you have created a work and you want to be
Speaker 1: able to distribute this as widely as possible. And you know,
Speaker 1: before the Internet, you really only had two options. You
Speaker 1: had an option of going with some sort of publication corporation.
Speaker 1: So either you know, a like a corporate publisher right exactly,
Speaker 1: like they're publishing novels or or it's a music publisher whatever,
Speaker 1: whatever a kind of art you're creating, you would have
Speaker 1: to go to to a major publisher to get widespread distribution. Yeah,
Speaker 1: like you're you've got an agent and they sign you
Speaker 1: to a deal. Not a self publisher right now. That's
Speaker 1: your other choice, as you go to a self publisher
Speaker 1: also known as vanity press from people who are writing uh.
Speaker 1: And in this case, you would pay the publisher directly
Speaker 1: to publish these books, and then you would try and
Speaker 1: sell them. The problem with that, of course, is that
Speaker 1: your distribution is usually pretty limited with vanity publishing. First
Speaker 1: of all, it's limited by your budget, because you're the
Speaker 1: one paying to have all these books or CDs pressed
Speaker 1: or whatever. Uh. And then of course it's limited by
Speaker 1: however widespread you can you can get the word out
Speaker 1: for people to actually purchase this stuff. It's limited by
Speaker 1: how far how much gas you have in your tank,
Speaker 1: and how many bookstores there are in your neighborhood. Now,
Speaker 1: I'm sitting here with one musician across the table from me,
Speaker 1: and another one staring holes in the back of my head.
Speaker 1: And uh and both of them, I as, I'm sure,
Speaker 1: are very familiar with the concept of self publishing. So
Speaker 1: the Internet gives people a new opportunity to distribute their
Speaker 1: work in a much more wider scale than they ever
Speaker 1: could on their own without it. So you can upload songs,
Speaker 1: you can upload an entire novel if you wanted to,
Speaker 1: and you can distribute it any way you like. Now,
Speaker 1: some people they want to foster a creative spirit on
Speaker 1: the Internet. They want their work not just seen by
Speaker 1: people who enjoy it, but they want people to take
Speaker 1: their work and transform it. Perhaps. Uh, you know, a
Speaker 1: musician may want we want to encourage people to remix
Speaker 1: his or her songs. Um and And the problem with
Speaker 1: copyright is there's no all recourse for you to do this.
Speaker 1: What you have to do is create a license agreement. Now,
Speaker 1: license agreements if you you know, there's if you're just
Speaker 1: going for a specific one, you pretty much have to
Speaker 1: hire a lawyer and work with the lawyer to hash
Speaker 1: out a license agreement that's that fits both your your
Speaker 1: needs and the person who wants to license the work.
Speaker 1: You know, what would be really cool, what's that would
Speaker 1: be really cool if there were like a template and
Speaker 1: you could you know that somebody had created you know,
Speaker 1: somebody like a legal expert, and they could say, well,
Speaker 1: you know what, if you want to license it this way,
Speaker 1: go with option A. If you want to license it
Speaker 1: another way, go with option B. And options C, D, E,
Speaker 1: n F are also available if you want to make
Speaker 1: parts of it available for people to use, or if
Speaker 1: you want to restrict it completely. In fact, that is
Speaker 1: such a good idea that other people have had it. No, yes,
Speaker 1: that's the birth of the creative commons. So creative commons
Speaker 1: is a way of licensing work so that you can
Speaker 1: tell people what what you do and do not want
Speaker 1: folks to do with the stuff you've created. And um,
Speaker 1: it's not the same as copyright. It's it's really it's
Speaker 1: really uh kind of a supplement to copyright. It's an
Speaker 1: idea that this tells people what you want them to
Speaker 1: be able to do, uh, whether or not you want
Speaker 1: them to be able to take your work and then
Speaker 1: add to it or or you know, transform it in
Speaker 1: some way. It also gives people the guidelines they need
Speaker 1: to follow in order to do that. Because one of
Speaker 1: the aspects of Creative Commons is that you know, you
Speaker 1: you may want to make sure people attribute the original
Speaker 1: work to you so that people can trace back all
Speaker 1: the way to the source of the original material. So
Speaker 1: attribution is very important in creative Commons. Uh, that's part
Speaker 1: of the license. So if people you know, decide to
Speaker 1: try and use create works that are licensed under Creative Commons,
Speaker 1: one of the things they're supposed to do is attribute
Speaker 1: the original work. And there their guidelines specifically on how
Speaker 1: things need to be attributed. A lot of these left
Speaker 1: up to the creator. Um, you know, whether they want
Speaker 1: to be uh mentioned by name or by a handle
Speaker 1: or both. Um, whether or not you know, you should
Speaker 1: include a website as well, that kind of thing, and uh.
Speaker 1: And this covers all sorts of creative material like books,
Speaker 1: short stories, music, images, uh not software software you you
Speaker 1: could technically covered under Creative Commons, but the the people
Speaker 1: who drafted Creative Commons um suggest that you don't do that. Well,
Speaker 1: there are other options for that too, write exactly. That's
Speaker 1: that's one of the that's one of the reasons they
Speaker 1: suggest that you shouldn't use Creative Commons for software because
Speaker 1: there are other choices out there that are better. YEP. Now, UM,
Speaker 1: creative commons actually hasn't been around for a terribly long time. Actually,
Speaker 1: at the twenty one century UH creation, UM, the Center
Speaker 1: for the Public Domain had a lot to do with it,
Speaker 1: and there were a lot of people involved it. UM.
Speaker 1: You know, probably the most recognizable name as UH Lawrence Lessig,
Speaker 1: who's UH lawyer and has been cited very very frequently
Speaker 1: as an expert in UH and copyright and other related
Speaker 1: and licensing and all sorts of related things. He's UH,
Speaker 1: he's an author and UM a lot of a lot
Speaker 1: of times. UM, you know, he gets asked about the
Speaker 1: these weird situations because you know, before the digital age,
Speaker 1: really copyright was a lot easier to pin down, and
Speaker 1: now there are all these methods of distribution that are
Speaker 1: causing the corporate organizations headaches. Um. There are all sorts
Speaker 1: of other UH contingencies like bands wanting to allow you
Speaker 1: to have access to their pro tools files to go
Speaker 1: ahead and make changes to the original songs without you know,
Speaker 1: even taking the finished tracks. I mean, these things are
Speaker 1: are things that would have been unthinkable just a few
Speaker 1: years ago. So it's important that that creative commons licensing
Speaker 1: and UH and public domain licensing overall is becoming more
Speaker 1: robust because it's enabling people to fiddle around with it
Speaker 1: a little bit more. And the funny thing I think
Speaker 1: about the licensing issues is that, um, some of the
Speaker 1: corporations are starting to loosen up a little bit and
Speaker 1: allow authors and other artists to you know, distribute these
Speaker 1: things more freely, like for example, nine inch Nails making
Speaker 1: their files available um and uh, authors like Corey Doctoro
Speaker 1: making entire books available for a short time, um, you know,
Speaker 1: online for free. And then you know, of course what
Speaker 1: they're finding out is it sells more copies of the
Speaker 1: actual protected copyrighted work. Right. Yeah, I've I've seen people
Speaker 1: who publish books and music under the Creative Commons do
Speaker 1: quite well. That Jonathan Colton does very well with his
Speaker 1: musician and uh, you know, the the important thing to
Speaker 1: remember is that Creative Commons doesn't stop anyone from selling anything. Um,
Speaker 1: you can. You can license your work under Creative Commons
Speaker 1: and still sell it for a profit. There's nothing stopping
Speaker 1: you from doing that. In fact, that's that's not the
Speaker 1: purpose of Creative Commons. It's really to give you options
Speaker 1: so that people know what they can and can't do
Speaker 1: with your work. Um. It really comes down to to
Speaker 1: the key terms what they call the key terms of
Speaker 1: the Core Suite of Creative Commons licenses. Sweet. Yeah, so
Speaker 1: attribution is one of those. We already mentioned that. So
Speaker 1: that's letting people, you know, know that they need to
Speaker 1: mention your name in regards to the work you created
Speaker 1: before they do anything with it and their share alike.
Speaker 1: And that allows other people to uh, create, distribute, or
Speaker 1: distribute derivative works, but only under the same share alike license.
Speaker 1: So if you make a derivative and make a distribution
Speaker 1: of that, then you have to let other people share
Speaker 1: to write. In other words, let's say that you take
Speaker 1: a song and you remix it. You can't tell people, hey,
Speaker 1: don't take this remix and remix that. Yeah, my remixes copyright. Now,
Speaker 1: you can't do that. No, it has to fall under
Speaker 1: the same the same parameters as the work that you
Speaker 1: took in the first place. There's non commercial, which of
Speaker 1: course means that you're not able to use the work
Speaker 1: in any way that would um you know, and essentially
Speaker 1: you can't use it in a way to make money.
Speaker 1: You can't use it for commercial uses. This one's really
Speaker 1: tricky because let's say that you have a song that
Speaker 1: you really like that has been published under the Creative
Speaker 1: Commons license, and you should be able to play that
Speaker 1: song on your website like you want to, and you
Speaker 1: know you're gonna attribute it and everything. But let's say
Speaker 1: that you also have advertising site and you get money
Speaker 1: from the ads. Now, even if the ads are not
Speaker 1: directly associated with the song, there does there's a gray
Speaker 1: area there the site is actually being used for a
Speaker 1: commercial purpose, using it to make money. Yeah, and if
Speaker 1: the song can be if you know, if you were
Speaker 1: to say, well, the song is part of that the
Speaker 1: song is part of the reason why people are visiting
Speaker 1: the site, then therefore those songs part of the reason
Speaker 1: why you're making money. That may or may not fall
Speaker 1: under the non commercial umbrella. It's it's a gray area.
Speaker 1: That's one of the more difficult ones to define. The
Speaker 1: final one is no derivatives. This is where you let
Speaker 1: people copy it, display it, distribute it, but they can't
Speaker 1: make derivative versions, remixes or anything like that. Yeah, if
Speaker 1: you write a song and want to change the layer
Speaker 1: and somebody else wants to, you know, you publish it
Speaker 1: under this license. Somebody else wants to, you know, rewrite
Speaker 1: the second verse, they can't do it because it's verbatim.
Speaker 1: You have to be the same way. Now, Let's say
Speaker 1: that you publish something and you put it under the
Speaker 1: Creative Commons License, and then later on you decide that
Speaker 1: you want to change that. Okay, here's the problem. Yeah,
Speaker 1: here's the problem. You can't really do that because it
Speaker 1: violates the whole idea of the Creative Commons license in
Speaker 1: the first place. Let's say that you've allowed people to
Speaker 1: make remixes of your songs for uh, for three months.
Speaker 1: You know, I've got this one song under the Creative
Speaker 1: Commons license, and you you had had it so that
Speaker 1: people could use the share like and then you decide,
Speaker 1: you know what, I don't I don't really want that
Speaker 1: to happen anymore, and I change that. Well, that kind
Speaker 1: of violates the whole spirit of Creative Commons. So you
Speaker 1: can't really do that. For one thing, how do you
Speaker 1: prove someone got hold of your song after you changed
Speaker 1: the parameter of your agreement If someone got hold of
Speaker 1: your son from before they got it under the Creative
Speaker 1: Commons license that said that they could share it if
Speaker 1: they got it after then they said that, you know,
Speaker 1: they couldn't share it anymore. Um, you can't really prove that.
Speaker 1: It's really hard to to prove. Hey, I got a
Speaker 1: hold of this digital copy back when you said it
Speaker 1: was okay, Uh, not after you said it wasn't okay.
Speaker 1: So if you're gonna publish something under creative commons, just
Speaker 1: keep in mind that it's it's pretty much a switch
Speaker 1: that stays on once you flip it on. It doesn't
Speaker 1: mean you can't again, doesn't mean that you can't sell
Speaker 1: things and make money off of them. It just means
Speaker 1: that the conditions that you agreed to at the beginning
Speaker 1: are you're pretty much stuck with those. And it seems
Speaker 1: like since it's a legal agreement then it should conceivably
Speaker 1: hold up in a court of law. Right, But again,
Speaker 1: when you're talking about using creative commons, um this again
Speaker 1: as a supplement to copyright law. If if you are
Speaker 1: the owner of the work, uh, then you're going to
Speaker 1: be using your your copyright as the basis of your argument,
Speaker 1: not creative commons necessarily. And now if you're the person
Speaker 1: being accused, you might be using creative commons as your protection, saying, look,
Speaker 1: this work was licensed under creative commons. I followed the
Speaker 1: parameters I attributed. I didn't use it for commercial purposes exactly.
Speaker 1: So therefore, since I'm covering up under the license, there's
Speaker 1: no there's no h substance to the complaint. Um. That
Speaker 1: would be the defense on the person who is using
Speaker 1: the work. You, as the person who created the work,
Speaker 1: you would rely upon copyright law and the copyright itself. UM.
Speaker 1: And again, like we said, if you create a work,
Speaker 1: it's under copyright if you register it. That kind of
Speaker 1: helps if you're defending your copyright in court. Not that
Speaker 1: you can't defend a copyright in court without registering. You can,
Speaker 1: it's just more difficult. It's easier to defend a copyright
Speaker 1: if you've registered it. It also tends to make people
Speaker 1: think twice because it just it carries with it a
Speaker 1: certain kind of gravitas, because it's official. You just wanted
Speaker 1: to use the word gravitas because it sounds heavy. It's
Speaker 1: the secret word for today. Everybody's scream good pewee Harman Vans.
Speaker 1: All right, then I don't really have a lot more
Speaker 1: on Yeah. The one other thing I will mention that
Speaker 1: just a tiny thing is that you can actually do
Speaker 1: search searches for Creative Commons material, which is very handy
Speaker 1: if you, let's say that you've got a podcast. You know,
Speaker 1: you're an amateur podcaster, and you're not making any money
Speaker 1: off of the podcast, and you want, you know, a
Speaker 1: really cool song to play in the background of your podcast.
Speaker 1: You can go through Creative Commons and find stuff published
Speaker 1: under Creative Commons. Um you can do searches in different
Speaker 1: uh using the Creative Commons as a as a one
Speaker 1: of the parameters of your search and find music that
Speaker 1: other people wrote that they'll be more than happy for
Speaker 1: you to use it as long as you again follow
Speaker 1: the rules. You know, you attribute it, you don't use
Speaker 1: it for commercial purposes. So that's another benefit is that
Speaker 1: it helps you find resources that you can't produce on
Speaker 1: your own to to make your own work that much
Speaker 1: more attractive. Yep. And as a matter of fact, if
Speaker 1: you're a Firefox browser fan, then there is a plug
Speaker 1: in that you can use and added to your search listings.
Speaker 1: You know, any stuff. Okay, Well, now I am done. Okay,
Speaker 1: then then let's move on to the listener mail. Nice
Speaker 1: list listener mail comes from John and John says, hey, guys,
Speaker 1: I just recently started listening to your podcast great Stuff.
Speaker 1: I was listening to the Augmented Reality one and recalled
Speaker 1: that some work had been done at my alma mater,
Speaker 1: the University of North Dakota School of Engineering and Mind's
Speaker 1: Mechanical Engineering Department. I remembered that some people had used
Speaker 1: augmented reality to play pac Man and Doom. Couldn't find
Speaker 1: a link, but it was done in Australia. Very cool stuff.
Speaker 1: Keep up the good work, John's thanks John. Yeah, augmented
Speaker 1: reality has been one of those things that people, you know,
Speaker 1: creative minds, find really cool things to do with augmented reality.
Speaker 1: I always think of the very simple stuff like looking at,
Speaker 1: you know, a restaurant scenes review, but there are so
Speaker 1: many other applications, and of course we only went into
Speaker 1: one or two of them. People who find ways to
Speaker 1: create augmented reality games awesome. So if any of you
Speaker 1: have any comments, questions, criticisms that sort of thing, you
Speaker 1: can email us. Our email address is tech stuff at
Speaker 1: how stuff works dot com. Um, you can learn all
Speaker 1: about copyright at how stuff works dot com. I encourage
Speaker 1: you to do that because it's one of those really
Speaker 1: complicated things that can really affect all of us, especially
Speaker 1: if we use the web a lot. And remember tech
Speaker 1: Stuff Live. We do a tech stuff Live show one
Speaker 1: pm Eastern every Tuesday. You can go to the tech
Speaker 1: stuff blog over on how stuff Works dot com. Check
Speaker 1: it out. Chris and I desperately try to inform you
Speaker 1: of the technology news of the week, and we do
Speaker 1: it with amazing special effects provided by Matt Frederick of
Speaker 1: Lions and Scissors. And I hope that you enjoyed this episode.
Speaker 1: Remember give us great reviews on iTunes because we like that,
Speaker 1: and we will talk to you again really soon for
Speaker 1: more on this and thousands of other topics. Does it
Speaker 1: how stuff works dot com and be sure to check
Speaker 1: out the new tech stuff blog now on the House
Speaker 1: Stuff Works homepage, brought to you by the reinvented two
Speaker 1: thousand twelve camera. It's ready, are you