View source for Archivierung von performativer Netzliteratur. Eine ernste Polemik

When we talk about literature based on the computer, it is not possible to distinguish between content and describing hard- and software. This is of crucial consequence for the filing. Netliterature that has the character of a work of art is to be divided into works of art that need proprietary software as a basis to make a performance possible and works that rely on open(ed) standards. Talking about the latter it is possible to file works together with the source code of the software that is needed to perform them and the documentation of the open standard. If you are interested in this kind of thing you will always be able to reconstruct a functioning platform on a universal machine of your own time. Digital works of art depending on proprietary software, however, typically must be allocated to the performance art. Therefore this type of performance art with proprietary software can only be filed as documentation. This is true for any performing netliterature that does not have the character of a work of art. Therefore, a digital piece of work that has not been documented after a certain time hereby is sufficiently filed. Typologically the phenomenon of weblogs cannot be assigned to network literature. Blogs are a „digital enlargement of an oral tradition“ (Geert Lovink) and therefore not a new form of writing. When trying to file the blogosphere it seems that a snap-shot-method is the most appropriate method that produces and files snap-shots of the blogosphere in scientific-statistical intervals. Peerto- peer networks are most likely one of the best filing methods for a knowledge-based society. However, by extending patent- and brand-law as well as copyrights, knowledge is systematically made proprietary and therefore these adequate forms of filing are constricted for the digital era.