three suggestions for Rovio to build their fan base

A promising statement from Mikael Hed at Rovio.

We took something from the music industry, which was to stop treating the customers as users, and start treating them as fans. [...] If we lose that fanbase, our business is done, but if we can grow that fanbase, our business will grow.

I have three suggestions for steps Rovio could take to build their fan base.

One: Release the game engine as copylefted free software. This would allow the free software community to hack and innovate on the engine yet require the community to give those improvements back to Rovio. This could lead to a better engine and even if it doesn’t, it will surely draw more people to the game (the headline itself would be huge, let alone the practical interest it would generate). Rovio would still be free to release their own proprietary version of the engine if they made innovations they didn’t want to share. Further, they could sell exceptions to the copyleft requirements if third parties wanted to use the engine in another application and release it as proprietary software.

Two: Apply a CC BY-NC license to the game’s skins and related artwork with proactive demands for attribution. The Non-Commercial restriction would work well alongside restrictive trademarks to protect certain revenue streams. If someone tried to sell products (e.g. other game versions or stuffed toys) that used the copyrighted works without permission, Rovio could take legal action but fans would be free to remix and display the artwork for non-commercial purposes. This could lead to Angry Birds artwork being seen by more people and therefore, generate more interest in the game. This is not to say that Rovio is actively pursuing fans who do amateur remixing, but why not explicitly promote it by changing the copyright terms?

Three: Authorize/endorse an official version of Angry Birds built by fans. Encourage fans to use the above openness to build new levels. Hold a contest and pick the top levels that make it into Angry Birds Fanatics. Also, a contest could also be held to develop new birds. Again, a contest where Rovio determines the best fan-made bird that makes it into the official version. Such steps would surely generate an even larger fan base.

Any other ideas?

too much credit where credit isn’t due?

Iain Thompson at The Register is probably giving these kids too much credit:

“Three high school juniors have been arrested after they devised a sophisticated hacking scheme [...]“

They broke into an office. That takes guts (and stupidity) but it’s hardly a “sophisticated hacking scheme”. What could make it “sophisticated” is that they somehow installed key-logging software on computers that teachers used – presumably requiring a hack to gain administrative access to those machines. However, while the report doesn’t explicitly state so, it appears the students didn’t need to make any effort to gain administrative rights to install software. The article simply says:

“The school has also upgraded its security and has advised teachers to change their passwords”

“Upgraded its security”? The Register is missing part of the story. How did the students gain root access to the computers to install the key-loggers? Likely, they didn’t “hack” anything. I bet all they did was break and enter to get physical keys and then install/use software (that any idiot could figure out) using a poorly kept secret. That is, I doubt a sophisticated cyber attack was launched to acquire the information needed to get root.

But more importantly, I think expelling the students is too harsh. Some service time to the school would be more constructive. Students shouldn’t be expelled unless they pose a physical risk to others or prevent others from benefiting from educational services.

legalizing insider trading & the Kim Schmitz case

I tend to agree with economists who favor legalizing insider trading and think the law is mistaken to classify insider trading as a subset of securities fraud.

For instance, take the charges against Kim Schmitz (known as Kim Dotcom now). Let’s say Schmitz did have every intention/possibility of investing 50 million euros in Letsbuyit.com. If he let some know in advance (“insiders”) and they got a jump on other buyers, where’s the harm in that? Like it or not, that’s what the stock market is; a place where those who have the most accurate information the soonest, tend to win. However, Schmitz reportedly had no means/intent to invest yet reportedly pulled in enormous personal gain using his relatively small original stake ($375,000) and others he gave false information to. If so, then that’s fraud; yet he was found guilty of “insider trading” despite not having any inside information to give.

what do taxidermists like to do on sunny days?

Some tanning.

Santorum on abortion: a consistent but puzzling position

Rick Santorum on abortion in the case of rape:

I respect the consistency of this position (“in every case”) though I disagree with its underlying premise. What I don’t understand is how anyone believing abortion is killing an innocent person can claim, in good conscience, that it’s OK if the embryo/fetus exists as a result of rape. It’s not OK to kill another person to make someone else’s bad situation marginally better.

While I’d agree with Santorum that a human life is present after conception, I disagree with Santorum’s premise that “a human life is the same as a person“. An embryo lacks the experience of complex mental activity to be considered a person. Human life that has only existed in body isn’t precious. Claiming otherwise is puzzling and I don’t see an inherent right to life for that human being. For this reason, there’s nothing unethical in a pregnant woman choosing to abort. Therefore, I support the right of women to choose and the right of doctors to help her carry out that choice safely.

Note also that Santorum slips up when he says his position “is not a matter of religious values” yet later argues that women should, “accept what God has given“. It is likely that Santorum really means “soul” but uses the term “person” to appear more secular in this matter.

revolutionary doublethink

When corporations hold some power in education and then take further steps to tighten that control, why do we call it a “learning revolution“? Digitized textbooks should be in open formats for editing and reading. Authors and publishers need to reject absurd EULAs, and educators need a dose of scepticism.

the philosophical difference between free software and open source software

captured in links:

The advantages of Free Software.

The advantages of Open Source Software.

abolish minimum wage and curtail union power

A few years ago, I would have thought I’d gone insane to say this but…I think governments should work towards abolishing minimum wage laws and reducing the power of unions.

However, I think a supportive infrastructure needs to be in place beforehand. This would include robust transfer payment policies for the unemployed and other vulnerable groups. As well, a public provision of health care and education that private entities are free to compete against. Unions should be limited in their ability to oppose firms that aim to improve efficiency by reducing or replacing their workforce but should be supported by laws when negotiating wage rates. I think this direction draws on some strengths of the free market and on the goal of equitable distribution of income. Flexicurity comes to mind.

“public” social networking (an observation)

Before clicking on the links below, be sure to log out of both Diaspora and Facebook.

A “Public” post through joindiaspora.com

A “Public” post through facebook.com

Hungary, open standards, and funding

Good news out of Hungary:

Hungary’s public administrations will by default use open document standards for their electronic documents, as of April this year, the government ministers agreed on 23 December, and all public organisations are encouraged to move to open source office tools. Hungary’s government also in December decided to cancel the funding of proprietary office suite licences for all schools.

What would make this even better would be to continue funding schools making the transition so they can better support their free software infrastructure. This would also help incentivize schools to make the switch.