Documentary as a ‘project’ in regards to definition is becoming very broad – so, does it need to be redefined or broken up into categories? Does a taxonomy of definitions need to be created?

• More importantly than trying to categorise the project, you need to start from the premise of creating work. ‘What do you want the work to do?’
• Taxonomies create dualisms and these distinctions always create problems of power which can be limiting i.e ‘This is, this is not’.
• However Seth made a good point that categorising can be seen as a useful tool in the fact that they provide us with the language in order to discuss documentaries.

How do documentary practitioners work with participatory contributions in regards to copyright and intellectual property?

• Intellectual property and copyright applies to all participatory documentaries
• Appropriate release forms are signed – Johnny Cash Project
• Twitter feeds are a grey area – public Vs private
• YouTube relies on consumers to provide content whilst documentaries are set up to encourage change and are set up for people to comment on social or political issues – different motivation

In regards to understanding the four categories of interactive documentary – How are they important independently, or should they complement each other?

• As discussed in question 1 it is important to think about the individual work rather than the category

How exactly are these relationships formed using different technologies? What connections can be made between different types of i-docs in regards to how they use technology?

• Utilising technology to represent reality
• User is internal or external
• It is important to look at each platform/project separately
• There are no general rules
• Need to look at what the work means/does