...] The director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation, Stuart Cunningham, argues in another submission that it is only in the non-commercial environment that the necessary depth of innovation and risk taking involved in user generated content and pro-am collaborations can occur. In this context it is significant that almost all the substantial submissions to the review argue for the ABC’s rich archives of content to be opened up to the public – something that is already underway on a small scale, as I have reported elsewhere. [...

First I wanted to clarify the level of QUT’s involvement – we don’t want to take credit where it’s not due.

We’ve been working with Pool on the release of the archival footage, but we can’t take credit for the project. It’s definitely Radio National’s initiative, they’ve done all the work. We’re just along for the ride, as observers as much as advisers.

And as to the Creative Archive Australia initiative – its still more of a plan than an actual project. Hopefully we’ll get it off the ground sometime this year. Until then, we’re just encouraging initiatives like Pool’s – individual archives pushing the boundaries to get their material out there.

Which brings me to responding to some of the comments above. The release of Government owned copyright material for re-use (ie not just viewing, but remixing etc) by an official archive is groundbreaking. While there have been some test cases with similar projects in Britain and Europe, Pool’s definitely leading the pack in Australia. And considering the budget limitations and bureaucratic barriers they’re facing, Pool should definitely be recognised and congratulated for it.

Imagine the rich resource that will become available to film makers, teachers, researchers, ordinary citizens if we can free even just a small portion of the ABC’s archives.

Maybe this is their way of edging toward the admirable web value of free content and if so then more blessings on them. I wonder if it’s another pragmatic way of putting up their stake in the poker game of media policy as NBN/freeview/digital etc approaches, in order to annexe (!) and manage the users of free archive much like the Catholic Church with cultures globally.

I just keep in mind Unleashed – nothing wrong with it either – ironic to think it is edited, and packaged. A bit like when 2JJ – according to legend way back when – got too radical and became the much safer Triple J. (Though who ever got away with playing those rap songs over New Year got cut off.)

Regarding the general culture of free content my little micro news blog deliberately states it’s intellectual property is open to be co-opted, the more it is the better I like it.

I notice rock dinosaurs Led Zeppellin let all there hugely popular 2008 reunion concert be grabbed by amateurs onto You Tube. Very sporting of them I thought. Millions of viewers by now. Robert Plant was just knighted by the Queen perhaps for such an attitude. And speaking of local cultural history the DVD of LZ in 1973 at the Sydney Showground is eerie with Germaine Greer as spunky reporter, or groupie, at a function afterwards.

The reality, of course, is that if they don’t make “their” cultural gems available (they’re actually “ours”: we paid for them) then the artists and culture-makers of the present and future will simply base their productions on material that is available — and the “gems” in the crown will be less valuable because their cultural relevance will decline.