Talk:Strategy for Information Markets/Remixing

TDang review April 2012
I'm reviewing this version. I'll likely be more critical than complimentary, because (a) that's the way I am and (b) that's what will help improve things. Please don't take the criticism-over-compliments to mean I have a wholly negative view.

Make sure to check the all-purpose review thoughts as well.

TDang (discuss • contribs) 23:05, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Have an introduction which appears at the top--do this by not giving the first chunk of text any section header.
 * Your signature should be reserved for the talk pages, not the main book text.
 * "software such as the program Maya, uses 3-d modeling to create new and different versions of an original copy. This program was actually used to create animation in films such as Spiderman and Lord of the Rings"--That sounds like original animation rather than remixing. You should come up with a better example.
 * "By using a program such as Web 2.0"--Web 2.0 isn't a program. (Or is it? If there is a piece of software called Web 2.0, that's a less common use of the term than this one.)
 * Don't make this a personal essay (most clearly this means don't refer to "I" or "me").
 * This is interesting material about music remixing. Now it needs to become more relevant to the subject matter of this course. Here's some random thoughts:
 * Connect remixing to "cumulative innovation" in general
 * Does intellectual property law encourage or discourage this kind of art (or non-art remixing)?
 * What are the economic efficiency impacts, good or bad, of IP law encouraging or discouraging it?
 * How is remixing similar to or different from other forms of synthesis? (Like an engineer taking insights from separate scientists to create an invention.)
 * What about much older remixing?
 * This probably isn't a good reference, but maybe partial inspiration: http://sydney.edu.au/arts/media_communications/salience/student_work/ferrari/remixhistory.html
 * Possibly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramsay_Wood
 * References--You're too reliant on one reference source. Try to find stuff related to what you already have but in different sources, maybe with different perspectives.
 * For instance, I bet there are other reputable sources talking about the legal issues around "No Protection".
 * You also risk crossing the line into plagiarism. If you paraphrase a small piece of one artical and then connect it to a paraphrase of a small piece of a different article, you're on safer ground than if you paraphrase a lot from a single article.
 * In fact, based on this search you have crossed the line. Since you're referencing your source, I'm sure it's an honest mistake, but I'm going to pull out the last paragraph just in case. If you want to put it back, do it much more carefully.