Copyright Ruling May Create Memory Hole

dublin writes: "C|Net's News.com reports that the recent US Supreme Court decision granting freelance writers stronger control over distribution of their work (a la RIAA) will result in the removal of large chunks of archived internet content from a large number of sites. The article reports that this will eliminate about 8-10% of the content at large publishers' sites. Will this marginalize freelance writers in favor of staff flacks more interested in the company line than the truth, concentrating even more power in the hands of the media moguls? What are the implications of that much content disappearing down the memory hole without a trace?" I bet a lot of lawyers are recasting boilerplate for future contracts about now, too.

Comments

Their own rules....

[BrynM]

On music:
RULING - Online distribution of copyrighted music is illegal.
People - But we thought we owned it since we bought it...
Time Warner - You merely bought the right to use it the way we see fit.

On Journalism:
RULING - Online distribution of copyrighted freelance jounalism is illegal.
Time Warner - But we thought we owned it since we bought it...
People - You merely bought the right to use it the way we see fit.

HAHAHAHAHahahahahahaha............

bm :)-~