Posted in: Technology

Prove Erick at TechCrunch Wrong

The video above explains why this post from Erick at TechCrunch is wrong: Seesmic’s new inline reply and inline threaded comment system is brilliant. I only wish I was an investor in Seesmic…and oddly enough Erick’s boss MA is. Still, always good to see that despite the conflict of interest that opposite views are tolerated, even when they are completely wrong as in this case.

My only request: if you’d like to respond to this video with a comment, or even a simple G’day, do so via playing the video above then commenting inline using the record feature in the embed itself, so we can prove this works.

Articles And Offers From The Web

Comments

5 Responses to “Prove Erick at TechCrunch Wrong”

  1. Otir

    It works. And I can still leave a written comment here, if it matters so much for people to “possess” comments on their own blog (if I understood the underlying rationale for calling it a “highjacking of comments”… This seemed to me such a mercantile perspective, when mine is made of totally different goals and underlying values. Sharing points of views. Conversations.

  2. Andy

    Whose has copyright over comments ?

    “the contemporary intent of copyright is to promote the creation of new works by giving authors control of and profit from them.”

    The creation of an artistic work brings about the rights which are inherit to copyright law. Any artistic work (refer to the statutory definition) includes written works. Comments are written and therefore those rights are passed to the author. There is no agreement – explicit or implied – which allows you to gain exclusive ownership over comments because their is no relationship which provides you automatic ownership by mere occasion.

    I think its more an issue of the anonymity on the internet and the fact that the only identifiable and tracable piece of evidence which can confer copyright ownership in a dispute is binary code and IP addresses.