blog.techlawadvisor.com

specifically not a blog about tech and ip law
August 2, 2003

It's Saturday

Non-IP Blawg of the Week
Mike O'Sullivan's Corp Law Blog. The reason: this useful practice tip on changing the name of a Deleware corporation.

Blawg Post of the Week
"Can the music and film industries make a real dent in peer-to-peer filesharing by bringing lawsuits against individuals? I believe the answer is no, unless the publicity surrounding the lawsuits begins to change social norms..." Copynorms by Lawrence Solum.

Article You Should Read
The Copyright Cage by Jonathan Zittrain

Unsolicited Advice
Two most important things for a professional blawg is to remove the blogspot ad / get your own url and provide RSS. + +

Congratulations
Jonas, congrats on this and I definitely enjoyed this.

posted by Kevin Esq. at 8:37 AM | |


July 31, 2003

Who owns the IP in a group blog?

Venkat digresses to ask that question after discussing the issue of whether Tyler Cowen should be kicked off the Island over at Volokh Conspiracy: Personally I hope we don't see a jettisoning in response to public outcry, as I believe proprietors of group blogs should determine membership outside of public reaction to posting.

I've got no problem with this Cowen guy myself, I kinda like his posts, but maybe they should boot him off for not being very responsive to emails.

Personally, I think it could be IP per permalink. Maybe that should be a new creative commons license.

posted by Kevin Esq. at 9:05 PM | |


One ISP Refuses to Yield

This Just In... While other ISPs have buckled under music industry pressure to hand over suspected file-swappers, SBC is ready to fight. The company files a suit questioning the RIAA's legal right to invade customer privacy.

posted by Kevin Esq. at 9:03 PM | |


July 29, 2003

I don't think for them

I just link for em. Apparently every blog must be a pundit or political activist for John Dvorak who is questioning whether blogs will ever get over the research and ridicule hump in his latest pc mag column: The Blog Politic Versus Congress.

Furdlog and Copyfight (who are mentioned in the piece) react here and here.

My prior ACCOPS activism here.

posted by Kevin Esq. at 10:07 AM | |


July 28, 2003

Should consumers be treated the same as competitors?

Jonathan Zittrain, in a NYT article on file sharing, is attributed as saying that "there is no obvious historical analogue to the scattershot subpoenaing of individuals in copyright law enforcement, which has traditionally been aimed at businesses or people who are profiting from illegally copied material." [via FurdLog]

Zittrain is drawing two distinctions here. The first is between use of the copyright and use of the work. A competitor uses the copyright, whereas a consumer simply uses the work. The second is that historically, copyright is a tool used against businesses i.e. competitors, i.e. the person selling pirated copies on the street, and not against consumers.

A Note on Fair Use

To further validate these points we can look at the fair use doctrine. 'As originally promulgated, the fair use doctrine was a fair "competitive" use doctrine designed to enable a rival author or publisher to use a copyrighted work in preparing another publication.’ Therefore, the doctrine applied only to competitors, not consumers. [cite]

What this means

1. If consumers don't use the copyright, then there can be no copyright infringement.
2. If copyright law hasn't been enforced against consumers for centuries, then can it be fairly be applied against them now?

And that, I believe, is the brilliance of the simple statement Zittrain made above:

1. to situate the debate historically in terms of legal / illegal use of copyright; and
2. to indicate that our anger is completely justified in response to the slew of RIAA subpoenas.

Another POV

Mark Rasch discusses "Copying is Theft ..." and other legal myths in the looming battle over peer-to-peer in his column on SecurityFocus. Although, Rasch believes that copying is not theft, he, like others, lumps together copying with piracy. He also believes that fair use is required in order to allow for certain uses of copyrighted works.

This ignores the historical origins of copyright and places emphasis on fair use, when all that is required is ordinary use.

Trackback: Derek Slater

posted by Kevin Esq. at 10:10 AM | |


Copyright
:: (c) 2003-2004 Kevin J. Heller some rights reserved ::

Disclaimer
The views expressed herein are solely the author's and should not be attributed to his employer or their clients. This site is not maintained utilizing the author's employer's resources or on company time. Any postings on legal issues on the Tech Law Advisor blawg are provided as a service to the web community, and do not constitute solicitation or provision of legal advice. I try to provide quality information, but I make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to from Tech Law Advisor. Legal advice must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case, and laws are constantly changing, so nothing in Tech Law Advisor should be used as a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. I am admitted to practice law in New York and New Jersey and do not intend to represent anyone desiring representation in a state where this site may fail to comply with any and all applicable laws and ethical rules. [*disclaimer via Denise Howell]

This web site is presented for informational purposes only. These materials do not constitute legal advice and do not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Kevin J. Heller, Esq. Please note that you are not considered a client until you have signed a retainer agreement and your case has been accepted by us. Please click here to view the terms and conditions upon which the materials contained on this web site are made available.

The author does not endorse or recommend any of the products or services for which advertisements may be displayed on this site by Blogads, Blogger, or Google.

Privacy Policy
Personally identifiable information about visitors to this site is collected only when knowingly and voluntarily submitted. However, this information will never be shared with third parties.