- We meet at 8:30 a.m. on Thursday. That's a half hour later than normal.
But you should have your drink and food at the table by then.
- We'll be hanging up posters when you arrive, and looking at them off and
on during our discussion.
- We DO have tutee meetings on Thursday and Friday. Our focus will be
discussion leadership and participation.
- Please listen to the following for Thursday's class:
- You should start working on your papers during break.
- There were a few more instances of total silence than I would have liked.
- I would have liked to have seen more instances of connections between
- Still, you folks continue to discuss well as a group.
- I also think that the leaders gained some insight on issues to
address in their papers.
- It seems that it may be useful for us to have a "Googler" (aka a
21st century live reference librarian) for class.
- I appreciate that this discussion leader had clearly paid attention to
my recommendations and comments from past discussions. In particular,
the leader kept people focused on the reading and video and was careful
to ask a few times "Can we hear from those who have not spoken?"
- The primary reading from Reason magazine was very nice.
- I was prepared to say that I did not like the videos, but the leader
did a very nice job of using the cartoon video for a compare-and-contrast
- The handout was a very nice touch. There's clearly a big difference
between reading about the Disney characters used in inappropriate situations
and reading/seeing them used in such situations.
- The discussion leader was too quiet. I observed a number of times in which
participants needed to ask the leader to restate the question.
- I didn't quite understand its structure, but the leader seemed to have a
nice diagram prepared of how the discussion should go and the topics to
- While I appreciated the leader's attempt to keep discussion focused
on the reading, this may have been a case in which a "What do you think?"
question would have been useful.
- The leader dealt quite well with my interruptions.
- It would be useful in the paper to consider parody vs. satire.
- We moved on to Scary Movie for a bit; given that the leader wanted
to consider this issue, it would have been nice if the leader had
obtained more background (e.g., whether or not the creators of the
Scary Movie series had obtained permission).
- DON'T BEGIN YOUR DISCUSSION WITH AN APOLOGY! (I give up.) (I also
didn't hear the apology, since I was frustrated by the apology.)
- The videos provided a very nice introduction to the topics and provided
a useful change of pace from the readings.
- However, it would have been useful to note that the videos were as
biased as some of the readings we did. For example, the fashion video
included a claim that copyright was not involved in open source software,
which is clearly false.
- I also appreciated that the videos gave us a sense of what a polished
professional presentation looks like. I hope that all of you will
strive to reach that level in your presentations.
- The leader worked hard to keep the discussion on track. However, this
sometimes meant that the leader cut off what seemed to be a useful
thread of discussion. (It can be more worthwhile to allow a group to go
deeper into a particular thread than to ensure that they cover everything.)
- There were some good opportunities to tie parts of this discussion to
the previous discussion, and I was disappointed that the leader or
participants did not take advantage of those opportunities.
- The leader had prepared some very helpful questions.
- I heard at least two useful issues. (1) A comment that "Why is there
no copyright for magic and comedy, but there is copyright for movies
and music?" (2) The issue of common sense and the problems with
common sense and fair use.
- The readings were quite useful in having us consider the same topic
from multiple perspectives, and the leader did a good job of carefully
guiding the group through each example.
- I wonder whether the discussion might have been improved by a more
careful consideration of the ordering, from
I can't believe that
anyone could consider that a violation to
Yeah, that seems like
it's almost a reasonable complaint. The leader might want to consider
using that strategy in the paper.
- At the beginning, the leader lectured a bit, but it was okay.
- It would have been nice if the leader had built up a bit more personal
background so that questions about "Why are companies pursuing these
suits?" and "What does trademark really protect?" could have been answered
a bit better. (I believe the leader did handle the second question well,
but there was clear confusion on the first.) These are issues that
can be addressed in the paper.
- The leader did an excellent job of keeping the discussion on track.