o-blog an i.p. blog
< previous items >
09-13 to 21
A rant from a blog about how the RIAA is
This piece argues that the RIAA’s lawsuits are
and they will get more than they bargained for.
The New York Times has been busy reporting and
commenting on filesharing and related issues this week. For example, a commentary on
“The Sharing Society.”
Then there’s this one:
“A Nation of Copiers.”
They’ve even posted a commentary in
about the issue.
Making the rounds this week is the text of a
to the RIAA.
The RIAA is
receiving the scrutiny
of a federal appeals court panel for its recent spate of filesharing-related subpoenas.
Digital Rights Management Bill,
an attempt to mitigate some of the excesses of the
Germany’s looking to revamp its copyright laws; the Register explains that there are a number of
The Senate, too, is looking at the RIAA’s
practices with regard to their access to
Tech Central Station explains why it may be perfectly legal to
share your music with others online —
for Canadians, anyway.
A call to end the
that’s embroiled digital music.
Making Sense of IP.
Lengthy and no doubt in-depth blog entry
“The Conceptual Plausibility of Intellectual Property.” (The author holds that IP
does make sense. Another writer on the web
offers his rebuttal.
Here is another stage of
And here the discussion
(for those with lots of time to read).
Recently at Infoanarchy.
Chilling Effects Clearinghouse,
an attempt to document the ways certain court findings prevent some content from every appearing in the first place.
A look at
to traditional copyright law.
A bit of humor from the Marx Brothers (a post rejects this as a publicity stunt, though):
Warner Brothers threatened to sue the Marx Brothers over the title of a film they were making.
Copying a “Way of Life”.
As a counter example, an NPR report
that fashion industry, where copying the designs of the upscale designers
is common and tolerated, yet the industry is, they argue, vibrant an alive with creative energy.
09-22 to 10-04
“The Copyright Cage”
is an essay by Jonathan Zittrain exploring the reasons why so-called ‘cyberprofs’ in Law have the sense that copyright law
is a “big mess.” Quote:
“A gerrymandered tax code primarily costs the public money — measured by overall inefficiency, or extra taxes unfairly
levied on those without political capital. But copyright’s expanding cost is measured by a more important if inchoate
currency of thoughts and ideas.”
by Graeme Philipson in the Sidney Morning Herald lays out one writer’s discontent with copyright. Quote:
“Copyright is not the natural order of things. It was invented only some 300 years ago to protect printers —
not writers. And it remains a means to protect the near-monopolistic rights of music companies, publishers
and software houses. It distorts the market and is a barrier, not a boon, to creativity.”
“Death to bland culture.”
Russell Smith, of the Toronto Globe and Mail
points out that,
“File-sharing is a rejection of the social power of bland culture. Why should we pay for crap?
“It’s not that I don’t want artists to get paid for their work. This is not about artists: It’s about crap.
File-sharing of pop music reflects a refusal of price-gouging for crap, for what is largely a disposable product anyway.”
Compact cassette is Forty.
In 1963, Philips introduced the compact cassette. It raised then many of the issues with copyright that file sharing
does today. I remember a record company sticker from the time that admonished: “Home Taping is Killing Music.”
A mail-art wag came up with a rejoinder in his own sticker: “… So Remember to do Your Share.”
The Guardian has this
on the format, which they say is “still going strong.”
< next items >