News

Posts for the front page of the site

Virtually Policy #6: Transmedia story telling and the crisis of authorship

Virtually Policy #6: Transmedia story telling and the crisis of authorship

In Episode 6 of Virtually Policy, Burcu Bakioglu (Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media at Lawrence University) talks to Michael Andersen, senior editor of the Alternate Realty Gaming Network (argn.com), about transmedia fiction and games.

In the show, they explore how transmedia storytelling and multiple authorships are challenging the ‘romantic’ notion of author as solitary creator and how emerging issues are casting legal shadows on the inclusion and acknowledgement of fan content in developing creative forms.

<< Episode #5
The co-creators: audience, artists & the future of music
All Episodes Next episode coming soon

Read more…

Virtually Policy #5: The co-creators: audience, artists & the future of music

Virtually Policy #5: The co-creators: audience, artists & the future of music

Episode 5 is an extended interview with Robert Thomas, Chief Creative Officer of RjDj, and Jim Purbrick & Max Williams, who together are 100 Robots (the group which provide the theme music for the Virtually Policy podcast).

RjDj is a reactive music application for iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch that creates a unique sonic experience each time you listen to a ’scene’. 100 Robots combines analog music creation with live control of electronically generated sounds using drum interfaces and iPhones/iPads/iPod Touches.

Both RjDj and 100 Robots have experimented with enabling their audiences to be co-creators of the live performance experience. They discuss how advances in technology are bringing music back to its participatory roots.

In this episode, we discuss how technology has changed our relationship with music from the pre-industrial age, where music was often a communally created and consumed experience, through the twentieth century that emphasised passive consumption of a recordings by ’star’ artists, to the present, where technologies such as karaoke, SingStar and Rock Band have enabled people to re-connect with music making.

<< Episode #4
Bitcoin
All Episodes Episode #6 >>
Transmedia story telling and the crisis of authorship

Read more…

Virtually Policy #4: Bitcoin

This episode of Virtually Policy is the second half of atwo-part interview with virtual currency expert Jon Matonis. Jon is editor of The Monetary Future, an economics blog.

In this second part of the interview we look at Bitcoin: what it is, how it works, why government don’t like it and how it might revolutionise the online gaming industry, and how it relates to human rights.

<< Episode #3
Virtual Currencies & Roach Motels
All Episodes Episode #5 >>
The co-creators: audience, artists & the future of music

Read more…

Virtually Policy #3: Virtual Currencies & Roach Motels

Virtually Policy #3: Virtual Currencies & Roach Motels

This episode of Virtually Policy is part one of a two-part interview with virtual currency expert Jon Matonis. Jon is editor of The Monetary Future, an economics blog that examines the intersection of free banking, cryptography, and digital currency. His work on digital cash has been published by Dow Jones and the London School of Economics, and he was previously CEO of Hushmail and Chief Forex Trader at VISA. Currently Jon is a board advisor to startups in Bitcoin, gaming, prepaid and mobile payment systems.

In this part of the interview we focus on the nature of currency and characteristics of virtual currencies, including Facebook Credits, Warcraft Gold and Linden Dollars.

Next week, in the second half of the interview Jon focuses on Bitcoin – what it is, how it works and how it relates to human rights.

<< Episode #2
Public diplomacy in the digital age
All Episodes Episode #4 >>
Bitcoin

Read more…

Virtually Policy #2: From Ghana to Second Life – public diplomacy in the digital age

Virtually Policy #2: From Ghana to Second Life – public diplomacy in the digital age

In the second episode of Virtually Policy, Bill May talks with Ren Reynolds about using social media and Second Life in public diplomacy.

After 30 working in the US Government, NGO’s and the private sector, Bill is now working on international public diplomacy initiatives and a social-technology start up venture. He recently left his position at the US State Department as Director of the Office of Innovative Engagement (OIE) where he led public diplomacy initiatives using new media and social networks to engage the world in support of the President, the Secretary of State and key strategic policy objectives. Previously in the State Department, Bill worked with international exchange programs, within the State Department’s Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA), where he received a Hammer Award from the Vice President’s office for developing an innovative information system, which improved the information flow between the USG and NGO’s.

In the podcast, Bill talks about using appropriate technologies and themes to engage with people across the globe and across cultures. Including the use of SMS and traditional media for President Obama’s visit to Ghana to bringing American and Egyptian students together in Second Life to create architecture.

<< Episode #1
Dutch Supreme Court on Virtual Theft
All Episodes Episode #3 >>
Virtual Currencies & Roach Motels

Read more…

White Paper: Virtual Items and Public Policy Q1 2012 update

the Virtual Policy Network’s white paper on virtual items and public policy has been updated to include the Dutch Supreme Court RuneScape case.

Virtually Policy #1: Dutch Supreme Court on Virtual Theft

Virtually Policy #1: Dutch Supreme Court on Virtual Theft

In the first Virtually Policy podcast, Arno Lodder, professor of internet governance and regulation at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam talks to Ren Reynolds about the Dutch RuneScape trial.

This case, which made it to the Dutch Supreme Court, centred on the issue of whether or not virtual items can be stolen. The Court concluded that they could, and two defendants were convicted of theft. Ardo and Ren discuss the arguments examined by the Court and ask what implications this case hase for the virtual goods business model which now underpins much of the entertainment and social media economy. Further detailed analysis of the case by tVPN and others can be found via links below.

All Episodes Next Episode >>
Public diplomacy in the digital age

Read more…

RuneScape Theft – Dutch Supreme Court Decision

On the 31st of January 2012, the Supreme Court of the Netherlands found that items in the online game RuneScape had been stolen from a player. This is a ground-breaking case as it is the highest national court in the West to rule that taking virtual objects in this way is theft under national criminal law. This ruling may have broad implications for the online games industry.

The case dates back to 2007 when two youths used violence and threats of violence to forced another player to log into the game of RuneScape. After the victim logged in to the game one of the defendants transferred virtual items and virtual currency from the victims account to their own. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction for theft but reduced the number of hours of community service to be served (taking into account Juvenile detention served).

The appeal did not turn on the material facts, i.e. whether there were threats were made or items were transferred. Rather, the appeal centred on the question of whether what had occurred was ‘theft’ as defined by the law of the Netherlands.

Key Arguments

The key arguments against the incident being defined as ‘theft’ considered by the court they were as follows:

  1. Virtual items are not goods but an ‘illusion’ of goods made up of bits & bytes i.e. they are data
  2. Virtual items are Information
  3. The point of the game is to take objects from each other
  4. The virtual items are and remain the property of the publisher of the game not the victim or the defendant - hence they could not have been stolen
Read more…

Policy Bites: EU Commission’s Proposed Data Protections

On the 25th of January 2012, the European Commission published a set of proposals relating to data protection. The proposals are not law and will not be law unless agreed by the members of the European Union but if they are agreed, they will make large changes the balance of power between EU citizens and all companies, giving greater power to the former and increased duties to the latter.

Read more…

Policy bites: Net Neutrality

Network Neutrality

What is it?

Net Neutrality (NN) is the debate over whether the internet should operate pretty much as it does at the moment or whether ISPs should be able to block or charge differently based on the application that a user is using, or alternatively give preferential treatment to a company e.g. Media Company X’s content streams just that bit faster than everyone else’s.

Net Neutrality stems from fact that some users consume a lot more bandwidth than others and often this is for services that are damaging the business models of existing companies. For example someone using Skype no long has to pay for their local phone company for long distance calls. The debate tends also to be linked with illegal downloading hence peer to peer services can find themselves being blocked.

Why it matters?

Net Neutrality seems like one of those obscure policy issues that never has an impact in the real world. But already companies have been caught out by non-neutral ISP policies. The kinds off issues that Net Neutrality presents for any game company with an online component (even if it’s just downloading patches), include:

  • Online games can be inadvertently blocked
  • Games that use peer-to-peer (p2P) networks for downloading can be blocked as bi-product of trying to cut down on illegal downloads
  • Voice over IP (VoIP) services can be blocked, impacting the increasing number of games that have integrated in-game voice
  • Ping time, which is critical to some games, is generally not part of the discussion but could be impacted
  • To avoid these blocks companies may be charged by ISPs

For social media the potential direct impact on big providers is that ISP’s may come asking for more money for preferential treatment. This will be an additional cost of business for big providers and possibly a killer for small providers. What’s more users on different ISPs may start to see the internet very differently impacting the kind of sharing that fuels Social Networks.

See more from tVPN on Net Neutrality: http://www.virtualpolicy.net/tag/netneutrality