RSS

  • 11 June, 2008

    Little Brother Binding by Evilrooster.

    posted by Pablo Defendini at 6:25 pm permalink

    Abi Sutherland, Making Light contributor and bookbinder extraordinaire, asked me for some of the off-register misprints from the first Little Brother edition, in order to put them to some good use. Well, she’s designed and made a kickass binding out of them, and showed me the pictures today. I then proceeded to run around the office like a thirteen-year-old showing everyone I could find her beautiful work.

    The dynamic between Camera Head on the front cover and Marcus on the back works beautifully (check out Abi’s Flickr photoset for images of the spine, the back, and the open spread), and the layout of the type is bold and in-your-face, true to the spirit of the book.

    This is a perfect example of why sharing your work and letting others remix it rawks.

  • 11 June, 2008

    The Pirate’s Dilemma, Now a Pay-What-You-Want e-Book

    posted by Pablo Defendini at 11:45 am permalink

    Matt Mason has finally been cleared by his publishers to make The Pirate’s Dilemma available as a pay-what-you-wish download. The PDF e-book is available here.
    I’ve already snagged my copy; I’ve been meaning to read this book for a while now, but my to-read stack of physical books has been pleading with me to not add to its bulk. However, a PDF which I can read on my laptop? Full of win.
    I can’t wait to get started. From what I’ve been able to read so far, via various excerpts online, the book should be chock-full of good, forward-thinking insight. I’m sure a close reading will engender one or two posts here, so this won’t be the last time I mention it.

  • 10 June, 2008

    I Think Lars Ulrich May Have Control Issues….

    posted by Pablo Defendini at 7:53 am permalink

    I used to be a big, big fan of Metallica when I was in high school. I still enjoy their music on occasion. But then two things happened, and they happened more or less at the same time: they started to suck —anything after the Black Album is trash, and the Black Album itself is already a departure from classic Metallica, really— and Lars Ulrich produced his now-infamous list of file sharers who were ‘ripping him off’ by illegally downloading Metallica tracks on the original Napster.

    The fact that four middle-aged, rock millionaires going through mid-life crises were essentially shaking down Shawn Fanning and co., crying about their ‘lost profits’ like some stupid corporate lapdogs was just too much. Ulrich’s ridiculous stance on file-sharing was even more absurd, considering that anyone even vaguely familiar with the band’s early days knows that Metallica first made their name by word of mouth. Back in the ’80s, when they were poor and metal, they actually encouraged people to make and distribute bootleg tapes of their material. Now that they were rich and washed-out, well, I guess they must look after their profits, no? Cliff Burton must be rolling over in his grave, dammit.

    So, done and done. I destroyed my Metallica CDs, downloaded their discography illegally, and forgot about the whole thing.

    Cut to a few months ago. Wired posts an article about how ‘Metallica Repents, Sort Of’. It turns out that the Metalli-windbags, after having had less-than-stellar studio outings since the ’90s, and after seeing the likes of Radiohead and Nine Inch Nails pursue successful online distribution strategies, have decided to follow suit, and release their new studio album online. Sort of. They set up a website called ‘Mission Metallica’ (no link love for these jerks), where they have been posting ancilliary material such as in-studio and live performance videos, photos, etc. However, what they won’t be doing is posting their album. On top of that, you have to sign up on the site to be part of their so-called community. Meh.

    Upon reading this, I was slightly intrigued, but upon reflection, and upon remembering that Metallica has sucked musically for the last decade or so, I said to myself “Too little, too late,” and moved on.

    Now this. It seems that Metallica has had early reviews of their new album pulled from internet sites, even though the reviews stem from a listening party that they themselves set up in London, at which no one was asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement. The kicker? The reviews were apparently (and surprisingly, at least to me) good, and heralded the album as a ‘return to form’.

    Idiots. Call me when the abum drops, so that I can go download it illegally and then immediately delete it from my drive, unplayed.

  • 5 May, 2008

    Little Brother, for download.

    posted by Pablo Defendini at 7:32 am permalink

    Cory Doctorow has released his fantastic new YA novel, Little Brother as a free, Creative Commons-licensed download. Go, go get it now. Read it, enjoy it, and share it, especially with the younger ones. I can’t stress this enough. This book is generating a whole lot of buzz, and for all the right reasons.

  • 22 April, 2008

    Watchmen ad creation contest.

    posted by Pablo Defendini at 1:02 pm permalink

    Zak Snyder has announced a contest for people to submit fake ads and other, Veidt Enterprises-related promotional material, here. The winning entries will be used as in-story content in the upcoming Watchmen movie. I’m split three ways about this:

    The fanboy in me is incredibly excited to see this film. Snyder outdid himself on 300. Watchmen, from what I’ve seen so far, looks to be of the same caliber and fidelity to the original comic. 

    The web-denizen in me is very interested to see a motion picture from a major studio integrate crowdsourcing into its production. 

    However, the creative professional in me balks at the idea that this is, in effect, a muti-national conglomerate (and member of the MPAA, no less) soliciting spec work from the masses, to be used in a profit-generating film. I have absolutely no doubt that some of the entries will be of professional caliber, and the thought of some hapless fanboy giving away his hard work for mere geek-cred just rubs me the wrong way. While, upon reading the fine print, one does find that there are cash prizes to be won,the legalese seems a bit sketchy to me. I’m inclined to speculate, but I am not a lawyer, and I have trouble parsing legalese, so I’ll keep my mouth shut. Anyone else have any thoughts?

  • 8 April, 2008

    Web fonts in Safari (yay!), and a copyfight brouhaha (boo!).

    posted by Pablo Defendini at 6:47 am permalink

    Typophile has a short rant about Apple’s claims that designers can now use any font when creating websites, using CSS3 specs, and that Safari will correctly render the typefaces:

    Apple says: “With CSS3 web fonts in Safari 3.1, web designers can go beyond web-safe fonts and use any font they want to create stunning new websites using standards-based technology. Safari automatically recognizes websites that use custom fonts and downloads them as they’re needed.”

    One of the biggest concerns around the Web fonts scheme is that Web designers would post commercial fonts through either ignorance or disregard of font licensing rights. Apple were aware of this (both Safari folks and Font folks) so I find it hard to understand why they’re telling web designers that they can post any font to the Web.

    Technically, Typophile is correct. And technically, so is Apple. The technology for embedding fonts is there, via the CSS3 standard and Safari’s ability to correctly parse this code. Legally, however, font foundries normally include a ‘no embedding’ clause in their EULAs, so using this (in my opinion, great and a-long-time-coming) technology is, in effect, a breach of contract. As some in the article’s comments section have mentioned, the fault here lies not with Apple, who are simply touting their product’s capability to do something, but with the foundries, whose legal language is outdated and doesn’t reflect changes regarding how their product is used.

    Granted, Apple probably should have included some sort of legalese warning about font licensing, like their infamous “Don’t Steal Music” warning back in the early days of iTunes, but criticizing them for this is akin to criticizing Xerox for making products that enable and facilitate the infringement of copyrights. 

    Will this make designers not use the Web Fonts feature? I doubt it. Personally, I find it incredibly compelling to be able to design for the web with any typeface. This bears re-stating, because I feel very strongly about it: incredibly compelling. The prospect of using fonts other than Verdana, Times, and Arial (bloody Arial, FFS!!) in online designs without having to resort to either tricky, image-based workarounds or the use of Flash is a very, very tempting proposition.

    This will make one of several scenarios come to pass: either 1) foundries will have to find a way to compromise, and change their EULAs to reflect modern usage of their products; 2) the technology will be crippled with some form of DRM, at the behest of the foundries (remember, Adobe is a foundry, and they have clout); 3) the foundries will form some sort of MAFIAA-esque litigating body to go after infringers, with craptacular results. Just one more example of how our copyright system just isn’t working, I suppose. Let’s hope that the foundries learn from the experience of the music and film industry (can’t stop the signal!), and come correct.

  • 1 April, 2008

    Going Magenta for Engadget.

    posted by Pablo Defendini at 1:00 pm permalink

    Because there are few things that piss me off more than frivolrous copyright-baiting by large corporations. Go Engadget, go.Image courtesy of Ryan Block, via Veronica Belmont.