My latest InfoWeek column, “In Defense Of Complaining,” went online while I was on break earlier this month — it’s a rebuttal to people who say that people who are upset about bad products should just buy something else, rather than complaining:

I’m always astounded by this reaction. Companies aren’t charities. They’re businesses. It doesn’t matter why they’re offering an unacceptable product — all that matters is that the product is unacceptable. Companies aren’t five-year-olds bringing their fingerpaintings home from kindergarten. We don’t have to put on a brave smile and tell them, “that’s just lovely dear,” and display their wares proudly on the fridge. I don’t care if Apple adds DRM because Lars from Metallica has incriminating photos of Steve Jobs, I don’t care if Sony BMG put a rootkit on its CDs because they were duped into it by a trickster spirit that appeared to their technologists in a dream. I care whether their product is worth my money. It’s the market — there’s no A for Effort.

Even weirder is the idea that companies shouldn’t be criticized because in a market, you should just take your business elsewhere. Free markets thrive on good information. For a market to function, customers need to have good information about which goods are worth buying and which ones should be avoided — that’s why we complain in public, to help companies make better decisions.

Link

Knowledge isn’t property: Guardian column

My latest Guardian column, “‘Intellectual property’ is a silly euphemism” is online — in it, I argue that although knowledge is important and valuable, it’s not property, and when we treat it as such, it makes us do dumb things. Hervé Le Crosnier liked it and translated it into French and put it online under a CC license.

It’s this disconnect that makes the “property” in intellectual property so troublesome. If everyone who came over to my flat physically took a piece of it away with them, it’d drive me bonkers. I’d spend all my time worrying about who crossed the threshold, I’d make them sign all kinds of invasive agreements before they got to use the loo, and so on. And as anyone who has bought a DVD and been forced to sit through an insulting, cack-handed “You wouldn’t steal a car” short film knows, this is exactly the kind of behaviour that property talk inspires when it comes to knowledge.

But there’s plenty of stuff out there that’s valuable even though it’s not property. For example, my daughter was born on February 3, 2008. She’s not my property. But she’s worth quite a lot to me. If you took her from me, the crime wouldn’t be “theft”. If you injured her, it wouldn’t be “trespass to chattels”. We have an entire vocabulary and set of legal concepts to deal with the value that a human life embodies.

What’s more, even though she’s not my property, I still have a legally recognised interest in my daughter. She’s “mine” in some meaningful sense, but she also falls under the purview of many other entities – the governments of the UK and Canada, the NHS, child protection services, even her extended family – they can all lay a claim to some interest in the disposition, treatment and future of my daughter.

Link,

Link to French version

Metropolis, a German/French documentary series from Arte.tv, shot a short documentary with me about online freedom and surveillance, and science fiction. They’ve put the episode online as a free, remixable, Creative Commons licensed download.

Link

Posted to Boing Boing yesterday — but in the hustle and bustle, forgot to put i t here!

I am ecstatic to announce a new Happy Mutant on the scene:

Poesy

Emmeline

Fibonacci

Nautilus

Taylor

Doctorow. Hatched at home, in a pool, this morning, in London, weighing 9 lbs and 6 oz. All bits correct and accounted for. Already stolen the hearts of all who see her.

Consider me on paternity leave until further notice.

Link