John Markoff at the Times has an article today about Flickr and other services which use internet connectivity to share information in novel ways. As Jeff Jarvis at Buzzmachine continually emphasizes, the trend is that consumers will have more control over content (and businesses had better build that into their plans). Here's Markoff:
Indeed, the abundance of user-generated content - which includes online games, desktop video and citizen journalism sites - is reshaping the debate over file sharing. Many Internet industry executives think it poses a new kind of threat to Hollywood, the recording industry and other purveyors of proprietary content: not piracy of their work, but a compelling alternative.
What I love is "citizen journalism sites"--- by which he means blogs, and by implication the gaping holes blown in the Gray Lady's deck. The whole rest of the article continues with this sort of malapropism, as if Markoff is trying to describe the ivory-billed woodpecker from some third-hand account (or holding a piece of roadkill at arm's length). C'mon, it's not that hard! The Washington Post does really fine at this.
The article I really wanted to read from the Times was how is the Grokster decision going to affect the setpoint between open and institutional content. I guess I'll go to Slashdot to find out.
UPDATE: Jeff has already jumped on this.
UPDATE#2: Wired talks about inclusion of copywrighted sounds in a podcast. If Apple points you to the podcast, is that incitement?
More generically, I cut and past images, and others publish long quotes. I frequently write about science ideas which are behind subscription walls. Is Blogger.com guilty of incitement? Am I?