[from a Friendster Bulletin Board]

Date: July 30, 2003 9:48 PM

Subject: The Fakester Manifesto

Message:
In light of recent developments, and in defense of our right to exist in the form we choose or assume, I hereby scribe this credo.

I. Identity is Provisional

Who we are is whom we choose to be at any given moment, depending on personality, whim, temperament, or subjective need. No other person or organization can abridge that right, as shape-shifting is inherent to human consciousness, and allows us to thrive and survive under greatly differing circumstances by becoming different people as need or desire arises. By assuming the mantle of the Other, it allows us, paradoxixcally, to complete ourselves. Every day is Halloween.

II. All Character is Archetypal, Thus Public

There is no aspect of every person�s personality that is not shared to some degree by all. Carl Jung called these archetypes, and recognized (and did Joseph Campbell and many others) that these traits are universal. Famous people and fictional characters merely magnify facets of our own personalities or fantasies, and these larger-than-life identities are created as much by society at large as by the famous individuals identified with them or the authors who utilized them. Such personalities are iconic and universal, and thus are created on a societal level by all of us. These public identities � very different and separate from private identities � belong to us all, and we are all free to use them and assume them as we wish. The price of fame or notoriety is that an identity, as a kind of public intellectual or emotional shorthand, becomes a form of public property and currency to be freely exchanged in our interactions and conversations. Art and media are forms of public discourse, and therefore are free and open forums for the unimpeded trading of these public identities.

III. Copyright is Irrelevant in the Digital Age

20th century notions of copyright are in reality bounded by 19th century upper-middle-class notions of property in which a thing that is �owned� cannot belong to more than one person at a time. Since this antiquated notion has often ruthlessly extended to human beings, such as slaves, women, and children, it�s only a short sideways step to imagine the ridiculous notion that identity is also property. This concept shortsightedly ignores the concept of community assets, and cannot easily wrap itself around non-material goods like ideas; how can one �own� the public perception of oneself? How the public perceives or internalizes the personality of a famous individual or fictional creation is not necessarily that person�s true character, it is instead a symbolic part of public cultural consciousness, and not �property� in the accepted sense of the word. It is important to note that ideas cannot be copyrighted � only manifestations of ideas � so even copyright law as originally envisioned takes into account the ephemerality and intangibility of concepts. The term �intellectual property� is a kind of logical dead-end, as ideas supposedly generated by individuals are in truth the result of the sum of their exposure to the total ideas of a civilization.

– “Roy Batty”

Continue reading →

[pulled from a Friendster Bulletin Board; written by “Roy Batty”]

Date: July 30, 2003 9:43 PM

Subject: fwd: AN OPEN LETTER TO THE FRIENDSTER COMMUNITY AND MANAGEMENT

Message:
The corporate masters at Friendster should be thrilled that they have such a vibrant online community as they now have on their hands. What they forget is that a living community, by definition, has a life of its own.

There are many of us here who play at being an alter-ego, and take the guises of celebrities or fictional characters, and are typically known as �Fakesters.� It is true that we appropriate imagery in theoretical violation of both the Friendster user agreement and copyright law. However, I believe both recent legal developments and legal precedent are on our side.

Three issues come to our defense:

1) PARODY.
Famously, as depicted in the film �The People vs. Larry Flynt,� parody is constitutionally protected free speech. The court�s defining test in that case, as successfully argued by Flynt�s lawyer against Jerry Falwell, was that nobody would ever believe that Falwell had really slept with his mother in an outhouse. In exactly the same way, nobody in their right mind believes for a second that Bj�rk or William Shatner (two of my Friendsters!) are really posting on this network � not to impugn their excellent skills as convincingly whimsical impostors, by the way! By violating our right to freedom of speech via parody, it opens the door to a potential legal challenge. (Anyone got a connection at the EFF who would like to elaborate on this angle?)

2) FAIR USE.
It�s been pretty well established that the age-old practice of Fair Use governs much of what transpires in the digital age. Quoting other authors� material in articles, sampling in music, and the regular referencing of other artists� visual ideas and motifs in mainstream media such as TV and movies occur thousands of times on a daily basis. When we �play� a famous person or character, we are doing exactly the same thing, and paying that person or creator the highest compliment we know. We wear their skin like a costume, and become not them, but postmodern referential versions of these icons blended with our own personalities and individual senses of humor.

3) COMMUNITY STANDARDS.
While the Friendster �berlords may have built the playground, they can�t shoo away the mischievous kids who don�t follow their unrealistic rules. This community is also defined by the individuals who comprise it, not simply by the people who mixed the cement for its sidewalk. They wanted people to visit their little world, and here we are � they can�t just ask us to leave or behave in exactly the way they want us to now that we�re just as responsible as anyone else here for getting the party really rolling. By current legal and ethical standards, Friendster, Inc. is not responsible for its members� behavior, nor should they be in the position of playing cop. Believe me, if somebody here didn�t play fair, or was abusive in any way, we�d report that person to the Principal in a nanosecond. Why? Because we care about this community as much as its builders, and have a very strong idea of community standards � we aren�t just errant scofflaws or out to mock the system (not all of us, anyway � and so what if we are?), but are here for entertainment, amusement, and personal connection � just as Friendster�s builders intended, right?! And damn, do some of these people make me laugh like I haven�t laughed in a long time. And the guys in charge want to STOP that? Are they HIGH?! They can�t buy publicity like the word of mouth this site now has � and it�s precisely because of so many clever, talented Fakesters that Friendster is worth visiting at all.

Deleting the photos and/or entire accounts of Fakesters is going to rudely, terribly backfire against the management of this site, and will ultimately take the entire community, real or parodied, down with it. The rumblings of dissent are already growing, getting louder by the minute. If Friendster wants to see all of the good will and excellent word of mouth it has generated go down in scorching, smoking, very public flames, then they can go right ahead with their little extermination campaign. The Internet is a big place, and we can easily take our party somewhere else � to a site where we are not only tolerated, but enthusiastically embraced.

Please pass the word and help fight the good fight. This is our home, too.

I thank you all, my dear new friends � both real and imaginary.

“Roy Batty”
Replicant and Fakester

Fu@!k Friendster is the latest Village Voice article about Friendster. Although the last one was nothing but positive, this one suggests that all is not well in wonderland, referencing the fakester genocide once again. The article references all of the Gawker blogging as well as pointing to alternative social network sites and Fallen, a graveyard for fallen Friendsters.

Continue reading →

Even if he calls me obsessive, Ryan’s posting on Real Life Friendster Power Games is quite entertaining. He considers the impact of Friendster discussions in RL situations where guilt, social banishment and attitude are all critical to indicating prowess wrt Friendster.

The articulated nature of Friendster generates serious political issues around social relationships. Determining where the cutoff is in a social hierarchy is challenging, but one’s decisions around this issue reflect one’s demeanor and presumed self-importance. Depending on the poignance of Friendster in certain groups, hierarchy tension is increased through the power playes regarding Friendster.