Welcome to my new blog!

Excuse the slightly convoluted blog title, options were slightly limited but this one makes sense in a way.

"Intellectual Property" is a term that has become increasingly popularized since the advent of the internet. Ever since the mp3-swapping site Napster was shut down by the RIAA (Recording Industries Association of America), the U.S. government has facilitated the RIAA and MPAA in their quest to protect their "property rights."

Meanwhile, programs like BitTorrent are making file-sharing increasingly fast, easy, and anonymous. This cat-and-mouse game is sure to continue, and while it does, there is an interesting conversation occurring to the side of this battle.

Some companies are exploring new business models to compete even with the free (as in free beer) culture being swapped on p2p sites. Apple's iTunes charges 99 cents a song, or $1.99 per TV episode, commercial free. The major TV networks now provide their latest shows for free on their websites, with limited ads. YouTube operates on Google's business model, in which quantity of ads are replaced by quality of directed advertising. Even "free" piracy sites often ask for donations, or banner ad clicks.

Now many Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have begun charging gradiated levels of internet access speed. A controversy around this move is that corporations can pay the ISPs to give everyone faster access to their mainstream websites. A poor person might not be able to afford to watch a video posted by another poor person, and would be bandwidth-limited to find the majority of their information from wealthy sources.

These latest developments have taken a major hit against the initial promise of the internet: free culture for all. Some would even suggest the motto of the internet generation is "information wants to be free." However I would suggest the internet is in its awkward teen years right now, and is experiencing some growing pains. ISP networks are not yet fast enough to handle the media onslaught the average TV-viewer is used to. Media distribution corporations are hugely powerful, with far reaching influences into government. A century of corporate monopolies refuse to go out without a fight.

But as people gain their news from more and more diverse sources, the focus of power will wane. However, even the diversity of our news sources is a huge point of contention! Even if a student films a newsbreaking video and posts it on YouTube, it is subject to their ability to socially network to get their video shown, and even if it does get distributed, the business model for independent content producers is still uncertain. Hosting a video on YouTube gives advertising rights to Google.

A handful of internet celebrities have been born each year, at an increasing rate. Lonelygirl15, Ask a Ninja, Homestarrunner, Somethingawful. Most of these have flourished by their consistently released content, mixed with selling memorabilia (shirts, keychains, bumperstickers, DVDs)

In this blog I will be tracking the evolution of the internet as a new venue for information distribution. I'll look at new ways to find new media, and the concessions these methods require (payment, advertising, or other) in hope to explore the most current ideal way to receive the information you surround yourself with.