The dated presentation by Ippolito regarding "Hacking Copyright for Fun and Profit" is interesting, for me, on a number of levels. Regarding the title, i have somewhat mixed feelings in terms of whether it is actually possible to "hack copyright for" ... "profit". Is it really a hack to simply selectively apply a rule? After all in my eyes copyright itself is there to assist in profitability.
The video itself provides a great context for "remix" culture and shows how collaborative art parallels a great deal to how the software which makes the internet function was developed. It seems that collaboration has become one of the latest buzzwords, but just like any other medium it may not fit every goal but it may also open up new areas to critique, parody or inspire.
In a sense i find the creative commons to be a reaction to the fact that many more people are having to deal with copyrights and the legality of creation. Ideas like the "Pool" are interesting but are destined to fail because they do not really host the projects but serve more as a registrar. In a sense it resembles the DARPA call for proposals book i mentioned in my IAA response. The projects may begin as proposals and may blossom into full blown projects but they may also simply die off.
In many ways this conjures up memories of a "hacking" group i was affiliated with in the late 90s where we released a number of utilities under the "FUQ" license, which basically uncopyrighted the work. The source and binaries were release with the statement:
"Do whatever the FUQ you want with this."
While i currently think that any form of copyright stifles innovation/creation i also understand their need. I wonder how copyrights work in communist countries? I am still conflicted on any singular positions regarding "intellectual property" but this presentation, although dated, has provided me with more food for thought.