Really Xerox? After all of the legal drama you've gone through, as publishers tried to hold YOU contributorily responsible for copyright infringement committed by your users?!
Comics and the law at Yale Law School
on
Law and the Multiverse
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Yale Law Library has also delved into this subject, putting together a video and exhibit about the law's depiction in comic books. I don't know to what extent the library is open to the public, but if you are near New Haven, the exhibit closes 16 Dec. 2010.
I agree, and even if you just changed the color by one hexadecimal value, it should frustrate the script, but not change the appearance much to the end user. BUT, I'm not sure if the script can just read what your "visited links color" is and use the color dynamically. We are both presuming that the script has hardcoded the "visited links" color. I don't know if that assumption is true.
This is a bad idea. The content cartels are not going to be satisfied by this reasonable accommodation. What they will do is use it as a hammer. "Aha, you censor auto-complete. That is an admission that X terms lead to piracy. Now you should censor them in all search results."
Look at the Viacom v. Youtube lawsuit. The content cartel doesn't give a fig for reasonable accomodations, they would squash all innovation where it might impact their bottom line.
Now, the DMCA does provide some Safe Harbor protections to Search Engine providers, but that can be defeated (by knowledge, inaction, etc.) And nothing presents policymakers (judges, legislators) from pointing to Google's admission regarding the keywords as evidence that the Copyright system needs changes.
The linked study is from 1998. It is unclear if the news source was responding to some follow-up research that was published, or (more likely) was searching the archives for some holiday-related news on a slow news day.
Under U.S. law, these commissioned works won't be in the public domain. There is no way to "create" a work into the public domain. Work only enters the public domain upon expiration of the copyright term. (The one way to create a work into the public domain, is that governmental works are not subject to copyright.)
What the project can do is create a contractual license that says that all-comers are granted a perpetual, non-exclusive license. Even then, presumably the resulting works would be works of joint authorship, with copyright residing in all of the authors. And under the reversion provisions of US copyright law, those orchestra members, or their families, could have the licenses terminated after about 30 years.
I'm not a maths guy, but I bet there is a topology pun somewhere in this idea. You are tattooing on a 2-D surface, stretched over a 3-D frame (your skeleton, muscles...). And isn't there a question in Topology or metaphysics about whether you can test whether the universe is curved, from the vantage point of a observer trapped within the curved universe? I think there is probably a pun in there... Also, isometric(?) representations of 3-D objects in the 2-D medium would be both visually appealing, but with some math relevancy.
The Italian Authorities actually threatened another man (Gioacchino Giuliani) with arrest for predicting this earthquake! And now they have the temerity to threaten scientists for not stepping forward with a warning? Well, with the incentives that you've put in place for the scientists, why should they put their necks out?!
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Italy_quake_kills_92_devastates_historic_0406.html
So, by clicking on the sponsored links we can cause BP to pay money to Google? (Presuming that AdSense charges for click-throughs as well as page-impressions.) Okay, I'm there.
I was having difficulty visualizing this technology, from the text description. Here is a YouTube video that sheds more light. Spoiler: essentially the tethered kite does figure-8 patterns to continually move the turbine through the water.
Why are you telling me that my document is "upside down"?
In a routine fax transmission, page orientation (top of the page first
into the machine or bottom of the page first) is not critical because
the reader can easily flip and arrange the pages to read them top to
bottom. However, it is critical to our process that each page is faxed
top to bottom with the top margin being fed first into the machine. Once
they have been received in PTAS, fax transmitted assignments are
processed strictly by electronic means. Although the PTAS software can
rotate a document 180 degrees for viewing purposes, when the electronic
document is extracted to generate the archival microfilm record, each
page is extracted exactly as it was first received. Accordingly, a
document sent "upside down" would be microfilmed upside down. To further
complicate matters, because the system generated recordation and reel
and frame markings on the pages would be in the opposite orientation,
the resulting document would be difficult to read.
You misunderstand the nature of "Intellectual Property" rights. It is not a "natural right" (such as the the right to bodily integrity). It is an artificial state-granted monopoly. And it's purpose is not to grant control over a person's work because they have a property claim to it. The US's IP regime exists to incentivize people to produce, because it benefits the public good. You appear to have some conception that producer's have an innate right to rigorous control over their work. This isn't how things work (at least in the US), and if you push on some of your assumptions, you will see how your system would lead to some absurd results.
Exactly. I had never even heard of this movie before Nintendo's legal action made this a newsworthy story. This free publicity will actually ensure that MORE people become aware of the movie and see it. So, if that was Nintendo's true purpose, then this didn't really accomplish anything. The film producer's won't make any profit off of bittorrent downloads, so if Nintendo's goals was to prevent people from profitting off of their Intellectual Property, than this may accomplish that.
As a final word, that statement from the producers is NOT genuine. It reeks of of a forced statement that Nintendo's lawyers forced him to make at "gunpoint" (ballpoint?) to stave off community outrage.
This is going to make users accustomed to entering their paypal credentials into all sorts of unique interfaces, on a variety of websites. It is going to condition users to be less guarded about their paypal credentials. As it stands now, you basically only enter your PayPal credentials into either the PayPal.com or Ebay.com domains. Users know that if anywhere else asks for their credentials, that it is a phishing site. I think this is going to be a minor disaster for PayPal. But hey, maybe they're cash-flush enough to eat the cost of all the new fraud claims that are going to result.
May a person petition the Federal court system to enjoin a state law enforcement official from prosecuting or threatening to prosecute a citizen of that state? Yes.
The design schematics for all the hardware and experiments from LHC are publicly available. By perusing the design schematics a talented amateur found a fundamental flaw that hundreds of experts spending millions of dollars missed.
Scott Moulton gave an excellent talk about Computer Forensics professionals needing Private Investigator (PI) licenses at Defcon 16. Basically the Private Investigator lobby has been pressing state legislatures to classify computer forensics as PI work. This does little to guarantee that the public is protected against poor/shoddy computer forensic work, and it does everything to increase the number of dues-paying members to the PI licensing body.
The law may be making the online community happen, in this instance, where it is causing the RIAA grief. But on the whole, laws like the Michigan law are not good for the computer forensic and computer security community.
One interesting area of exploration would be the European Unions requirements for user interface design. EU Directive 90/270 covers this. I attempted to provide a link, but most of the commentary seems to be in PDF form.
This seems like a desperate push by the republicans in congress and the Bush administration to impose more Intellectual Property laws. Note, that as an "international agreement, it bypasses the Constitution's treaties process. That is, it does not need to be presented to Congress and voted on. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty#United_States_law
The odd things is that this is going to have a chilling effect on crossing borders and visiting other countries. People are not going to want border agents going through their data, because it is intensely private stuff. Family pictures, financial statements, personal medical records. Consider also, that there has so far been no disclosure as to how the border agents in the various countries will be storing and securing your data.
I'm thinking maybe the air-traffic control systems? Aren't there frequent complaints that they are outdated? Or perhaps some kind of defense system, like NORAD, etc.
Berkman is very forward-looking and proactive regarding emerging issues of Law and Technology. The various fellows have been vocal and supportive of copyright reform. With such an interested, knowledgeable band of law professors and law students, it would be a serious black-eye if the RIAA attempted to litigate on the Harvard campus. I have to believe that they would be handed a bruising defeat, that would establish precedent regarding their campaign of extorting* settlement monies from poor college students.
* I mean extortion in the common, non-technical sense. Don't sue me for libel please.
I contacted Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal's office and was advised that the initiative is being handled by the General Law Committee. I contacted their office on 09 March 2007 and was informed that the proposed legislation would likely be attatched to House Bill #6981
-PHiZ
Slashdot Mirror
Really Xerox? After all of the legal drama you've gone through, as publishers tried to hold YOU contributorily responsible for copyright infringement committed by your users?!
Yale Law Library has also delved into this subject, putting together a video and exhibit about the law's depiction in comic books. I don't know to what extent the library is open to the public, but if you are near New Haven, the exhibit closes 16 Dec. 2010.
http://blogs.law.yale.edu/blogs/rarebooks/archive/2010/10/18/video-of-quot-superheroes-in-court-quot-talk-is-now-available.aspx
I agree, and even if you just changed the color by one hexadecimal value, it should frustrate the script, but not change the appearance much to the end user. BUT, I'm not sure if the script can just read what your "visited links color" is and use the color dynamically. We are both presuming that the script has hardcoded the "visited links" color. I don't know if that assumption is true.
This is a bad idea. The content cartels are not going to be satisfied by this reasonable accommodation. What they will do is use it as a hammer. "Aha, you censor auto-complete. That is an admission that X terms lead to piracy. Now you should censor them in all search results."
Look at the Viacom v. Youtube lawsuit. The content cartel doesn't give a fig for reasonable accomodations, they would squash all innovation where it might impact their bottom line.
Now, the DMCA does provide some Safe Harbor protections to Search Engine providers, but that can be defeated (by knowledge, inaction, etc.) And nothing presents policymakers (judges, legislators) from pointing to Google's admission regarding the keywords as evidence that the Copyright system needs changes.
http://www.wpbf.com/download/2010/1122/25875732.pdf
The linked study is from 1998. It is unclear if the news source was responding to some follow-up research that was published, or (more likely) was searching the archives for some holiday-related news on a slow news day.
Under U.S. law, these commissioned works won't be in the public domain. There is no way to "create" a work into the public domain. Work only enters the public domain upon expiration of the copyright term. (The one way to create a work into the public domain, is that governmental works are not subject to copyright.)
What the project can do is create a contractual license that says that all-comers are granted a perpetual, non-exclusive license. Even then, presumably the resulting works would be works of joint authorship, with copyright residing in all of the authors. And under the reversion provisions of US copyright law, those orchestra members, or their families, could have the licenses terminated after about 30 years.
I'm not a maths guy, but I bet there is a topology pun somewhere in this idea. You are tattooing on a 2-D surface, stretched over a 3-D frame (your skeleton, muscles...). And isn't there a question in Topology or metaphysics about whether you can test whether the universe is curved, from the vantage point of a observer trapped within the curved universe? I think there is probably a pun in there... Also, isometric(?) representations of 3-D objects in the 2-D medium would be both visually appealing, but with some math relevancy.
The Italian Authorities actually threatened another man (Gioacchino Giuliani) with arrest for predicting this earthquake! And now they have the temerity to threaten scientists for not stepping forward with a warning? Well, with the incentives that you've put in place for the scientists, why should they put their necks out?! http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Italy_quake_kills_92_devastates_historic_0406.html
So, by clicking on the sponsored links we can cause BP to pay money to Google? (Presuming that AdSense charges for click-throughs as well as page-impressions.) Okay, I'm there.
I was having difficulty visualizing this technology, from the text description. Here is a YouTube video that sheds more light. Spoiler: essentially the tethered kite does figure-8 patterns to continually move the turbine through the water.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qCDRj8TE9Y
Why are you telling me that my document is "upside down"? In a routine fax transmission, page orientation (top of the page first into the machine or bottom of the page first) is not critical because the reader can easily flip and arrange the pages to read them top to bottom. However, it is critical to our process that each page is faxed top to bottom with the top margin being fed first into the machine. Once they have been received in PTAS, fax transmitted assignments are processed strictly by electronic means. Although the PTAS software can rotate a document 180 degrees for viewing purposes, when the electronic document is extracted to generate the archival microfilm record, each page is extracted exactly as it was first received. Accordingly, a document sent "upside down" would be microfilmed upside down. To further complicate matters, because the system generated recordation and reel and frame markings on the pages would be in the opposite orientation, the resulting document would be difficult to read.
You misunderstand the nature of "Intellectual Property" rights. It is not a "natural right" (such as the the right to bodily integrity). It is an artificial state-granted monopoly. And it's purpose is not to grant control over a person's work because they have a property claim to it. The US's IP regime exists to incentivize people to produce, because it benefits the public good. You appear to have some conception that producer's have an innate right to rigorous control over their work. This isn't how things work (at least in the US), and if you push on some of your assumptions, you will see how your system would lead to some absurd results.
Exactly. I had never even heard of this movie before Nintendo's legal action made this a newsworthy story. This free publicity will actually ensure that MORE people become aware of the movie and see it. So, if that was Nintendo's true purpose, then this didn't really accomplish anything. The film producer's won't make any profit off of bittorrent downloads, so if Nintendo's goals was to prevent people from profitting off of their Intellectual Property, than this may accomplish that.
As a final word, that statement from the producers is NOT genuine. It reeks of of a forced statement that Nintendo's lawyers forced him to make at "gunpoint" (ballpoint?) to stave off community outrage.
This is going to make users accustomed to entering their paypal credentials into all sorts of unique interfaces, on a variety of websites. It is going to condition users to be less guarded about their paypal credentials. As it stands now, you basically only enter your PayPal credentials into either the PayPal.com or Ebay.com domains. Users know that if anywhere else asks for their credentials, that it is a phishing site. I think this is going to be a minor disaster for PayPal. But hey, maybe they're cash-flush enough to eat the cost of all the new fraud claims that are going to result.
May a person petition the Federal court system to enjoin a state law enforcement official from prosecuting or threatening to prosecute a citizen of that state? Yes.
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/03/31/215247
As a side note, your legal analysis completely missed the point, and you should have kept it to yourself.
Sigh, mis-posted in the wrong thread =(
The design schematics for all the hardware and experiments from LHC are publicly available. By perusing the design schematics a talented amateur found a fundamental flaw that hundreds of experts spending millions of dollars missed.
Scott Moulton gave an excellent talk about Computer Forensics professionals needing Private Investigator (PI) licenses at Defcon 16. Basically the Private Investigator lobby has been pressing state legislatures to classify computer forensics as PI work. This does little to guarantee that the public is protected against poor/shoddy computer forensic work, and it does everything to increase the number of dues-paying members to the PI licensing body.
The law may be making the online community happen, in this instance, where it is causing the RIAA grief. But on the whole, laws like the Michigan law are not good for the computer forensic and computer security community.
Scott Moulton's talk at Defcon 16: http://defcon.org/html/defcon-16/dc-16-speakers.html#Moulton
One interesting area of exploration would be the European Unions requirements for user interface design. EU Directive 90/270 covers this. I attempted to provide a link, but most of the commentary seems to be in PDF form.
How does this affect 802.11 B and G devices? Can I expect greater stability in those products, or does this only help out 802.11n hardware?
This seems like a desperate push by the republicans in congress and the Bush administration to impose more Intellectual Property laws. Note, that as an "international agreement, it bypasses the Constitution's treaties process. That is, it does not need to be presented to Congress and voted on. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty#United_States_law
The odd things is that this is going to have a chilling effect on crossing borders and visiting other countries. People are not going to want border agents going through their data, because it is intensely private stuff. Family pictures, financial statements, personal medical records. Consider also, that there has so far been no disclosure as to how the border agents in the various countries will be storing and securing your data.
I'm thinking maybe the air-traffic control systems? Aren't there frequent complaints that they are outdated? Or perhaps some kind of defense system, like NORAD, etc.
I think one likely reason that the RIAA/MPAA are avoiding Harvard is because of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society which is an outgrowth of the Harvard Law school. You may be familar with Berkman through the Chilling Effects Clearinghouse, OpenNet Initiative (mapping government repression of the Internet worldwide), and the Stop Badware projects.
Berkman is very forward-looking and proactive regarding emerging issues of Law and Technology. The various fellows have been vocal and supportive of copyright reform. With such an interested, knowledgeable band of law professors and law students, it would be a serious black-eye if the RIAA attempted to litigate on the Harvard campus. I have to believe that they would be handed a bruising defeat, that would establish precedent regarding their campaign of extorting* settlement monies from poor college students.
* I mean extortion in the common, non-technical sense. Don't sue me for libel please.
Is there somewhere where we can send donations to help out the poor beleaguered RIAA, who can't afford their legal bills? -PHiZ
I contacted Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal's office and was advised that the initiative is being handled by the General Law Committee. I contacted their office on 09 March 2007 and was informed that the proposed legislation would likely be attatched to House Bill #6981
-PHiZ