You can download the whole book here, though you have to be really hard-core to read the entire thing electronically, since it’s nearly 500 pages. (I am really hard-core, in that specialized sense.)

Benkler is a genius – one of the five smartest people I’ve ever met – and a very high-level conceptual thinker. This book is a masterpiece of synthesis of his work and that of others about fundamental changes in production of information-related goods made possible by changes in technology. Peer production can match and even overmatch the market and the firm under appropriate circumstances; fan creations are a good example of this. As Benkler says, “The supplementation of the profit motive and the business organization by other motivations and organizational forms – ranging from individual play to large-scale peer-production projects – provides not only a discontinuously dramatic increase in the number of available information sources but, more significantly, an increase in available information sources that are qualitatively different from others.” Benkler’s use of the “supplement” resonates intriguingly with that of Marvin Carlson and people like Francesca Coppa who’ve been applying performance theory to fandom: Each version of a story is a link in a chain of meaning. On the web, that link might be actual html.

If you’ve been reading in the general area of current intellectual property, this book is not revelatory, but it connects and explores lots of trends and their implications for information production, democracy, and culture. Benkler doesn’t think the outcome is predetermined: Technology offers new possibilities, but law and the interventions of large-scale businesses that stand to lose ground could frustrate those possibilities, for example by ending net neutrality, preventing people from copying as part of remix culture, and so on. (Eric Goldman might be distressed that Benkler doesn’t identify anti-spam laws as one of the laws designed to limit freedom on the net, but Benkler ends with a caution about justifications for increasing centralized control based on concerns for “security” in a post-9/11 world. Though it was written many months ago, it seemed quite timely.)

Stylistically, it’s pretty abstract, with occasional examples. Benkler is a careful thinker, not lost in jargon, and capable of a flourish once in a while, as when he’s in the midst of refuting the idea that electronic communication creates worse ties between people than previous modes – he quotes a critic who says, “E-mail is a way to stay in touch, but you can’t share coffee or beer with somebody on e-mail, or give them a hug,” and adds “(as opposed, one supposes, to the common practice of phone hugs).”

From: [identity profile] kaseido.livejournal.com


This sounds like something I'd like. I haven't read in the field in a few years - sounds like a 21st Century updating of Manuel Castells?

Thanks for the review!

From: [identity profile] kaseido.livejournal.com


Seriously!

And now I have something to do while auditing one of my instructors' classes tomorrow night! :P

From: [identity profile] rivkat.livejournal.com


If you read the whole thing during one class period, I will be extraordinarily impressed.

From: [identity profile] corinna-5.livejournal.com


This book was pretty damn abstruse for me -- the sort of thing that made me wish I had a week to sit with it, but I wasn't sure I'd learn enough that I didn't already know to make that worth it. I'm not sure how much of the difficulty is that I'm out of practice reading academic texts and how much is that his academic areas of expertise were never mine to begin with.

From: [identity profile] rivkat.livejournal.com


I wouldn't call it revelatory, but his synthesis of what's going on in law and information production is impressive and very helpful to people like me, who are working in that area. But if you don't have a week and don't need to read it for professional reasons, it's probably not worth it.

From: [identity profile] bklyndispatch.livejournal.com


Benkler is a genius – one of the five smartest people I’ve ever met

this made me wonder, who are the other four?


From: [identity profile] rivkat.livejournal.com


Excluding my father on nepotism grounds, (1) my friend Steve Burt, a poet who happens to know organic chemistry, (2) Dan Markovitz, Yale law, (3) Richard Primus, Michigan law (may be moving), and (4) my friend Nascent from XF days, who writes novels and does microbiology with the same ease. This is not in order. My definition of smartest depends heavily on the ability to figure out good questions to ask about any theory or argument even outside one's field.

From: [identity profile] bklyndispatch.livejournal.com


My definition of smartest depends heavily on the ability to figure out good questions to ask about any theory or argument even outside one's field.

that's an excellent guide to defining smartiness.
.

Links

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags