Mesh represents the first time I’ve truly ‘live blogged’ an event.  I’ve learned a few very interesting things in the process.

• It’s a great way to take notes and kick off a conversation

• When you record your thoughts in a stream-of-conscious method, you can sometimes miscommunicate or forget to review some of your initial thoughts that have evolved

The opening paragraph of my blog on Michael Geist’s session (Michael Geist: Digital advocacy is the new normal) is one of those paragraphs that needed to be revisited.  Michael’s session was loaded with new examples of digital advocacy in many disciplines, and featured a great list of pointers for successful digital advocacy.  What I had meant by overlap of content is that there is a common thread in Michael’s presentations — which is a good thing if you’re presenting on a common theme.

Michael, I owe you a beer.

I’ve seen Michael Geist speak on several occasions and each time, despite the overlap of the content, each presentation is engaging and fresh. (defensive clarification: There is a common thread in Michael’s presentations, which is a good thing. This presentation was loaded with new examples on a theme I have heard Michael speak about)

In today’s keynote at the Mesh conference, Mr. Geist provided a steady stream of relevant examples of sites, videos and blog posts that have been instrumental in spreading important messages and rallying people for issues in the public interest. There were also examples of the use of Twitter to rally for intervention of citizens in matters that involve local authorities, and mashups of technologies such as the use of Google Maps to geo-locate violent activities.

What makes digital advocacy effective:

1. organizing power (Here Comes Everybody)
2. online AND offline
3. mainstream media (what gets reported gets blogged, what gets blogged gets reported)
4. educate
5. bring to action
6. speed
7. new digital tools (thanks Dave Fleet)
8. localized
9. government 2.0
10. general purpose sites

In the conversation that followed, Michael defended the idea that a large online gathering (e.g. 40,000 people in the Fair Copyright for Canada Facebook group) is not necessarily representative of the interested population of subject matter experts and concerned citizens. Michael pointed out that any large gathering is representative of a larger group of people made up of different levels of understanding and experience. The groups are necessary to effect change.

The issues that Canadian citizens are up against are politics, not policy. Michael used the example of Canadian copyright reforms to demonstrates that, where once policy people informed and supported politicians in creating policies that would satisfy a majority of Canadians, politicians are now directing the policy people on what the policy should be and how it should be crafted based on external influences such as US government pressure. The missing ingredient seems to be public consultation, particularly with key stakeholders including the artists affected by the law.

Laws including the DMCA are based on projections of where the technology and society will go. This approach has hindered, not helped, advancements of technology and the arts. It has also created divides and distrust of governments and the key beneficiaries (such as record companies not artists or consumers, movie companies…) of the laws.

After a long and opinionated discussion about the political establishment, someone asked about the danger of online advocacy being co-opted by consumer rights instead of human rights. Michael agreed that duplicating the impact of the Fair Copyright for Canada would be difficult in any situation though there are great examples of digital advocacy. The impact is really up to the people the initiate and participate in various campaigns.

It’s hard to get people engaged. However, getting them connected in a social media community that targets a specific cause, that’s a start. There is a formula that politicians use along the lines of every single letter represents 1000 other citizens. The more people that become involved, the better chance we have as individuals to become groups that can effect change.

Mesh opened a few minutes ago with a great monologue about social media by The Voice from CBC radio’s The Current.  I would love to get a copy of that monologue!

While I had been looking forward to the keynote by Matt Mason, a visa problem has kept him from making the trip from the UK to Canada.  In his place, Michael Geist will be delivering the keynote in a few minutes.

The program is packed with great sessions which has made it difficult to choose between concurrent sessions.  I’m counting on the hallway conversation to fill in the blanks for me.   If this morning is any indication, the hallway conversation is going to be strong throughout the event.

It was great to meet Mark and Alex from Viigo and I am looking forward to using their technology on my iPhone when it’s ready.

The University of Ottawa Law and Technology program hosts something called the Torys Speaker Series which features thought leaders and subject matter experts discussing issues related to law and technology. The next public session looks great!

Facing up to Facebook
A discussion panel on social media and social networking

Please join the Law & Technology group as Professors Jane Bailey, Jeremy de Beer, Michael Geist, Ian Kerr, and Valerie Steeves discuss legal issues arising from Facebook and related social media technologies.

Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Time: 11:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.
Place: Fauteux Hall, room 351
Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa

Please RSVP to techlaw@uottawa.ca.
Join the Facing up to Facebook event page.

By the way, Michael Geist, Ian Kerr, Jeremy de Beer and Jane Bailey are all contributors to the book, In the Public Interest: The Future of Canadian Copyright Law, published September 2005 and available for purchase (CDN$50 for a printed copy) or as a Creative Commons, by-the-chapter, download.

The CBC is reporting that Canadian Heritage Minister Bev Oda is committing $29 million to fund new media over the next two years (Oda pledges funding for new media at Banff TV fest). The fund is administered by Telefilm and it appears that most of the money will be for video-based projects, though there is a mention of audio projects.

The report quotes Oda as saying “The rate and speed in which Canadians are moving into the new era seems to be lagging behind those in some other countries”. I can’t help but think that a lot of this has to do with confusion and concerns relating to copyright and licensing, and a general misunderstanding among the business community over new media, its potential and low barriers to entry.

If Canada is to become competitive in new media, it will need to simplify copyright laws and licensing fees, and initiate a campaign to educate Canadian businesses and media organizations.

Hat tip: Michael Geist

Shortly after being contacted by John Harris Stevenson with details of the Copyright Board’s Tariff 22 hearings, I discovered that Michael Geist has blogged about SOCAN’s proposed $60 annual fee for podcasters whose music programming accounts for 20% or less of their podcast.

If I understand that correctly, podcasters would pay an annual fee of $60 to obtain performance rights to include any amount of music in their podcast provided the music programming does not exceed 20% of the program content. Before you get too excited, remember that this proposal only applies to the rights which SOCAN can license… performance rights. Podcasters will still need to obtain reproduction rights.

I will be meeting with John Harris Stevenson later this week to discuss the hearings. John is representing community and campus radio at the hearings and has suggested that the podcast community may want to present a formal case to the Board.

Stay tuned.

I’m flattered that I was nominated by the Never Was blog for a Thinking Blogger Award. The idea appears to be to promote blogs that are interesting, informative, and provide value. What a compliment!

I have decided to make my nominations based on people who are bloggers first and may (or may not) podcast as a way to further spread their message. Here are my nominations for a Thinking Blogger Award:

1. Michael Geist - I realize that this is seconding the nomination that appears on the Never Was blog. Michael blogs about copyright, licensing, net neutrality and many other issues that relate to technology and Canadian law. Besides being well written, well spoken and prolific, Michael is an incredibly nice guy and that has to be worth some points.
2. Tod Maffin - While Tod does publish the odd satirical and off-beat post, he predominantly blogs with a critical view on many topics including technology, broadcasting and social media. Another well written, well spoken, prolific and all-round nice guy. What is it with these people?
3. Chris Brogan - Chris is a champion of the community aspect of social media, both online and in-person. His blog offers insight into the application of social media to build communities and it regularly examines the relationship of social media to traditional modes of communication. On top of everything else, Chris gives free hugs.
4. Robert Safuto - Awakened Voice is a fantastic blog that examines the tools of social media and offers great thoughts on the social media phenomenon. Robert publishes video tutorials on how to setup and use the tools. I’ve never met Robert, though I’m sure he’s as nice as everyone else on this list. I wonder if he’ll come to Podcasters Across Borders.
5. Dale Arseneault - Dale’s blog specializes in knowledge management and organizational innovation, though his expertise stretches further to include areas such as transformation, facilitation and collaboration (and many other “ations” I’ve overlooked). If you can think beyond the professional/business centric focus of his blog, you will find that there is a lot in there that can be applied to everyday living. Oh… and Dale’s incredibly nice, too.

Here are the rules of participation in the Thinking Blogger Awards:

1. If you get tagged, write a post with links to 5 blogs that make you think;
2. Link to this post so that people can easily find the exact origin of the meme; and,
3. Optional: Proudly display the ‘Thinking Blogger Award’ with a link to the post that you wrote.

I have been catching up on my blog reading over the last few days (I fell behind sometime in late 2006). I’ve made huge progress. In the process, I have been reminded why I want to have Michael Geist speak at Podcasters Across Borders. Actually, there are many reasons.

Two of the posts that I have read so far this morning should be required reading for any Canadian Podcaster who has an interest in licensing issues and/or the use of music on their shows:

• In Good Company
• The Future of the Canadian Music Industry

Michael Geist’s blog is loaded with critical and insightful discussions on matters related to licensing and copyright.

The Podcasters Across Borders program will be announced later this month.

I was a bit disappointed in Cory Doctorow’s September 9th post, URGENT: Podcasters act now to stop anti-podcasting UN treaty! While he provided a quick explanation of the problem and links to some of the efforts to stop the treaty, there was a noticeable absence of links to the source material. This is one example of how citizen journalism can fail in the “attention to detail” department.

University of Ottawa law professor Michael Geist has blogged about the treaty with a Canadian eye. His post, The Most Dangerous Treaty You’ve Never Heard About, presents a more thoughtful explanation of why we should be concerned. His second paragraph provides the following summary:

The impact of the treaty on individuals and creators could be dramatic, potentially making it more difficult to record television shows for viewing at a later time, locking up content that is otherwise in the public domain, and necessitating that film makers obtain twice as many consents for the re-use of broadcast clips.

After explaining the impact of the treaty, Professor Geist expresses concern over the secretive process that has led to this treaty and offers a summary of the apparently VERY FEW and VERY SMALL public consultations.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office conducted an open afternoon session last Tuesday in Washington that enabled approximately 40 supporters and critics to air their views…

The Canadian approach has been even more secretive.

Canada has not conducted any public consultations on the treaty nor issued any public statements articulating a definitive Canadian position

Michael Geist writes a weekly column for the Toronto Star. His September 11th column is entitled Leaders weirdly silent on sweeping broadcast treaty.