The Prime Minister has returned from his holiday to find his £100,000 blog, which launched last week is taking a bit of a shoeing in the press. Downing Street has learned that running a high tech, interactive, multimedia Nu Meeja operation* isn't as easy as El Reg makes it look. First, there's been a round of open sourcey …
Maybe it was the luchtime beer...
But I read "the site's masthead" as "the shite's masthead"...
NMM did not read the CCL very carefully
<quote>You must include a copy of, or the Uniform Resource Identifier for, this License or other license specified in the previous sentence with every copy or phonorecord of each Derivative Work You distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly digitally perform. </quote>
And most importantly:
3. If you distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly digitally perform the Work or any Derivative Works or Collective Works, You must keep intact all copyright notices for the Work and provide, reasonable to the medium or means You are utilizing: (i) the name of the Original Author (or pseudonym, if applicable) if supplied, and/or (ii) if the Original Author and/or Licensor designate another party or parties (e.g. a sponsor institute, publishing entity, journal) for attribution in Licensor's copyright notice, terms of service or by other reasonable means, the name of such party or parties; the title of the Work if supplied; to the extent reasonably practicable, the Uniform Resource Identifier, if any, that Licensor specifies to be associated with the Work, unless such URI does not refer to the copyright notice or licensing information for the Work; and in the case of a Derivative Work, a credit identifying the use of the Work in the Derivative Work (e.g., "French translation of the Work by Original Author," or "Screenplay based on original Work by Original Author"). <strong>Such credit may be implemented in any reasonable manner; provided, however, that in the case of a Derivative Work or Collective Work, at a minimum such credit will appear where any other comparable authorship credit appears and in a manner at least as prominent as such other comparable authorship credit.</strong>
So did Nathan Barley steal the guy's code or not?
The "explanation" is that they looked at his code but then decided to "code a theme [...] from scratch" whilst keeping the folder name intact. I wonder how much staring, copying and pasting went on.
And is claiming that one was merely inspired by some work, casually mentioning your solicitor to the guy who provided the "inspiration", the missing second stage in the notorious three stage profit plan?
To be picky, "hebdomas horribilis", surely?
Predicted impact of crisis on the polls....
... precisely zero.
Seriously, I can't imagine an open source spat over attribution even managing a pixel blip on the graph of general voting public intentions. No-one cares.
And as for the pathetic Clarkson video. I estimate this took one copy of Microsoft Movie Maker and one civil servant one lunch hour. Hardly likely to drain the public purse of funds.
Clarkson for PM?
I thought the little You-Tube video was quite funny, it can't have cost more than about £20 to make and showed at least someone, somewhere, in Nbr 10 has a sense of humour - formerly a lost art for denzines of that abode. Possibly the first time I've ever had something positive to say about them!
A tight lipped official said...
...Our statistics show it is a very popular internet destination & most of the expenditure can be justified due to the fact it was derived almost entirely from the 'backhanders and gongs' fund
"those with cognitive learning difficulties"
I'm not sure whether to point out that that must include most of the inhabitants of No.10, or that it sounds like a tautology. I mean, what other sorts of learning are there..?
As for the site, if it's government and it's IT, then it must be a disaster area. QED.
That is not all ...
Now Dizzy and Guido are reporting that the web site has outed an undercover copper!