Why PodCasting philosophy needs to avoid sounding just like Radio
I just read this post from Doc Searls. I must say the title sucked me right in. After reading what he had to say I decided that the title was wrong and really needed to be "Why PodCasting philosophy needs to avoid sounding just like Radio". In the post Doc goes on to write "So far, it's mostly about talk, and (as Dave Slusher highly recommends) music with Creative Commons licenses or other unencumbering copyrights."
He makes it sound like PodCasters go out of there way to use "music with Creative Commons licenses or other unencumbering copyrights". I really wish this was the case. He then goes on to make his case that PodCasting is not like Radio based around the point that since Podcasts don't use copyrighted material like Radio they are not Radio like and can possibly avoid all the legal issues that goes with awakening the copyright lawyers.
But I ask, does the PodCaster movement really have such strict content format rules or philosophy? Come on now, the pioneers, role models of the movement from the beginning have used copyrighted material in their PodCasts. In some cases their listeners have come to expect the listening of copyrighted material roled into a Radio like format in the PodCast.
If there was really a "PodCaster pure copyrightless content philosophy" then I might agree that you have a new movement that goes along with a new audio content delivery method. No matter how you spin it that's not what's being preached here right now and nor what I hear from the PodCasts I download and listen to on my PC's Window's Media Player.
When Chris Porillo wrote a couple days ago "It's nothing more than Internet radio at its core, folks. It's audio, on-demand, that's easily synchronized with your computer system / portable media device... in theory " he was referring to what we are hearing right now.
Doc also says "And as long as podcasting isn't characterized as radio, it has a better chance of staying clear of that regulation."
I agree. That is why I commented to Adam Curry right after his first use of copyrighted material right in his Source Code PodCast. This philosophy needed to start then not at some later date after we figured all this tech stuff out.
If this new philosophy never gets started here I totally agree with what Chris said "It's nothing more than Internet radio at its core, folks. It's audio, on-demand, that's easily synchronized with your computer system / portable media device... in theory ".
IMHO no new philosophy means Podcasting will be seen by the masses as just a new way to distribute old Radio with PodCasters needing to follow all the rules that goes with that and early adopter PodCasters competing with old Radio when and if they move to this new Radio distribution model.
Summary: Prioritizing adopting the philosophy of discovering and using public domain, Creative Commons licenses or other unencumbering copyrights, new formats, niche content, etc. equally along with the technology (XML feed format, directories, cool names..) is the way to go right from the beginning and will make this something new and different to the masses and most importantly attractive to future money - advertisers!!!
I'll end by saying this Creative Commons licenses or other unencumbering copyrights, public domain, new formats, niche content, etc.has been my Audioblogging philosophy goal and IMHO the philosophy of most audiobloggers from the beginning.
Doc Searls: Why Podcasting isn't Radio link via Scripting News