Communications Decency Act Issues Raised in Recent Facebook Suit

Facebook is being sued for content it has posted according to an article in PC Mag.com.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2353659,00.asp

A comprehensive discussion of issues around the Communications Decency Act of 1996, Section 230, is located here:

http://www.cdt.org/publications/policyposts/2008/4

An excerpt from this article by the Center for Democracy & Technology states:

"The four amicus briefs [filed by the CDT] essentially all argue for the same thing: a continued reading of §230 in the spirit that Congress intended and that a multitude of courts have so far followed. Any departure would otherwise stifle the provision's purpose and undermine industry strides towards responsible self-regulation. In those briefs, CDT argues that "intermediaries" - ISPs, websites, and online service providers that enable other people - Internet users - to post content onto the Internet should not be held liable for the content posted. To hold intermediaries liable would greatly chill their willingness to host online content created by others. To use a simple example, if the YouTube.com video sharing website had to be legally responsible for the content of the tens or hundreds of thousands of new videos posted to it each day, the site could not possibly continue to operate as an open forum for users' video expression."

The Citizens Media Law Project also provides a comprehensive overview:

http://www.citmedialaw.org/section-230

And, another excellent discussion on David Johnson's blog

http://www.digitalmedialawyerblog.com/2009/09/lessons_from_batzel_v_smith_no.html

EFF Launches Free, Creative Commons-licensed "Teaching Copyright" Curriculum and Website

According to an announcement from the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation), "last week, the Copyright Alliance Education Foundation (a nonprofit mouth piece for the entertainment and software industries) unveiled plans to spread its protectionist ideas to the nation's schools and libraries through the distribution of a curriculum titled 'Think First,Copy Later.'"

The EFF states that the "Think First, Copy Later" curriculum is similar in nature to other intimidating educational materials produced by corporate interests such as the MPAA, RIAA, Business Software Alliance -- these types of educational materials are created, according to the EFF, to "scare students into believing that making copies is wrong."

But what students and teachers don't need, is more intimidation. Instead, the EFF recognizes that what is needed is "solid, accurate information that will help them make smart choices about how to use new technologies." In response to this, EFF has just launched a free, Creative Commons-licensed "Teaching Copyright" curriculum and website "to help educators explore copyright issues in their classrooms."

The materials appear to be very easy to navigate and understand, and will "encourage students to discover their legal rights and responsibilities — including how to make full and fair use of technology that is revolutionizing learning and the exchange of information."

The EFF teaching materials and curriculum can be accessed here:

http://www.teachingcopyright.org/

My Research Participants' Misunderstanding Was Also Obama's?

One area of clear misunderstanding that arose in my copyright study, was that professional writers were not fully aware of the government exception to copyright protection. That is, items authored by the US government are not copyright protected, but are in the public domain. It appears that the Obama administration fell prey to this same misunderstanding but has now, thankfully, corrected itself.

http://www.citmedialaw.org/blog/2009/white-house-drops-license-restrictions-photos-flickr-stream-now-public-domain

"When the White House photos first appeared on Flickr in April, Fred Benenson of Creative Commons and others pointed out that the government couldn't grant a CC license on content to which it didn't own the copyright and hypothesized that the administration likely chose a CC Attribution license as the least restrictive option available to it because Flickr "doesn’t allow their photographers to choose Public Domain as an option to release their work to the world." (As Hugh D'Andrade of EFF pointed out, Flickr does have a public domain option (of sorts) on the "Commons" portion of its site, which acts as a repository for certain public photography collections. This "No known copyright restrictions" label, however, is only available to participating institutions like The Library of Congress and The Brooklyn Museum.) "

Nixon Library to Open New Materials in June

On June 23, 2009, the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum will make newly available 154 hours of Nixon White House tape recordings and textual materials among the Nixon Presidential Historical Materials.

"The tape recordings will be made available on the Web at http://www.nixonlibrary.gov beginning at 9 a.m. (EDT)/6 a.m. (PDT). The textual materials will be made available at the National Archives building at College Park, MD beginning at 11 a.m."

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-11515.htm

"Judge Dismisses U. of Missouri's Lawsuit Against a Professor in Dispute Over Inventions"

"A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit that the University of Missouri system filed against one of its professors in an intellectual-property dispute." See the Chronicle News Blog

http://envoy.lcc.edu:2065/news/article/6471/judge-dismisses-u-of-missouris-lawsuit-against-a-professor-in-dispute-over-inventions

Questions that arose during the DMCA 2009 rulemaking hearings

Some issues arose during the 2009 DMCA rulemaking hearing that took place in the US Copyright Office. One of these issues was concerning the use of screen-capturing software such as snag-it, camtasia, and morae. Snag-it was the only application mentioned by name. These discussions took place both during the educational exemption panel (afternoon May 6), and the general exemption panel (the vidders, morning May 7).

No one in the room, either those representing the motion picture industry, the copyright office panelists, nor those testifying in favor of the use, could say whether or not such screen capturing software is accomplishing a "circumvention" of technological protection measures.

So that question was left open.

Another question that arose, was whether or not an exemption for copying is even needed, since the DMCA was never intended to prohibit circumvention for purposes of copying as opposed to circumvention for purposes of gaining access. The MPAA and those opposing the exemption, argue that since both the access and copying controls are folded into one, to circumvent for copying is the same as circumventing for gaining access. I asked the copyright office to address this in its recommendations. They discussed it in the April 3, 2006 transcript, but never made a determination on this issue. The legislative summary I quoted from during my testimony clearly states that it is not the intention of congress to stop people from circumventing in order to make copies.

Another interesting development, was that there was consensus from the other side of the aisle, those opposing the exemption, that the kind of use I showed, a student created montage done for an academic conference, a course seminar, and submitted towards degree completion, was certainly a "fair use" under section 107.

Southeast Alaska Funerary Object to be Repatriated

Notice appearing in the Federal Register, E9-10577:
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-10577.htm

Quote:

In 1976, an object was removed from a cave in Port Malmesbury, Kuiu
Island in Southeast Alaska, by a Forest Service archeologist. The
object is a wooden artifact that is believed to be a funerary object
since the cave where it was removed from contained human remains and
associated funerary objects. The human remains and associated funerary
objects that were removed from Port Malmesbury, Kuiu Island were
repatriated to the Organized Village of Kake in 1998, and are described
in a Notice of Inventory Completion previously published in the Federal
Register (63 FR 18034-18035, April 13, 1998). Due to an administrative
oversight this funerary object was not included.
   Historical and ethnographic records, along with Tlingit oral
history, indicate that a smallpox epidemic in the 1800s decimated the
Tlingit communities on Kuiu Island and the survivors moved to Kake and
Klawock. The members of the Killerwhale clan in these villages are the
descendants of these survivors.
   Officials of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Tongass National
Forest have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(B), the one
object described above is reasonably believed to have been placed with
or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part
of the death rite or ceremony and are believed, by a preponderance of
the evidence, to have been removed from a specific burial site of a
Native American individual. Officials of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Tongass National Forest also have determined that,
pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group
identity that can be reasonably traced between the unassociated
funerary object and the Klawock Cooperative Association and Organized
Village of Kake.

Canada put on 301 list

http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2009/05/02/special-301-process-acclaimed-by-industry-assailed-by-public-interest-groups/

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3911/125/

I cannot understand why the US ignores that fact that inserting its laws in other countries, is inserting its culture. Some of these cultures are incommensurable with the western IP paradigms . . .there are ways to accomplish goals of protecting IP, but not by ignorning the real problems of cultures with very conflicting paradigms about authorship, individuals, and ownership.

Marybeth Peters discusses copyright and the library of congress

http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2008/08/02/HP/A/9571/Marybeth+Peters+Library+of+Congress+US+Register+of+Copyrights.aspx

Quote: "Obama Administration Lock(e)s And Loads Against Movie Piracy"

http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2009/04/22/obama-administration-lockes-and-loads-against-movie-piracy/

From the Intellectual Property Watch:By Liza Porteus Viana for Intellectual Property Watch @ 12:41 am

[being quote]WASHINGTON, DC - The Obama administration will fight for the movie industry and work to aggressively enforce its intellectual property protections both at home and abroad, United States Commerce Secretary Gary Locke said here Tuesday.

Locke offered almost unabashed support for the industry, which, according to a report released Tuesday [pdf] by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), created 2.5 million American jobs in 2007, paid an average production worker US$74,700 a year in salary, paid out $41.1 billion in salaries to American workers, paid $13 billion in income and sales tax and was responsible for $13.6 billion in trade surplus.[end quote]

I am really concerned about the one-sidedness of Locke's perspective. Where are the voices of the NCTE lobbyists? Do they even know what is at stake here?

Antidumping Activity

Antidumping, not what you think.

What do circular welded carbon steel pipes and tube from Taiwan, hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from India, and wooden bedroom furniture from China all have in common? They were this week subject to antidumping evaluation by the US Department of Commerce, along with Vietnam frozen fish fillets (catfish) and honey from Argentina.

According to wikipedia, "dumping" can refer to any kind of predatory pricing. "However, the word is now generally used only in the context of international trade law, where dumping is defined as the act of a manufacturer in one country exporting a product to another country at a price which is either below the price it charges in its home market or is below its costs of production. The term has a negative connotation, but advocates of free markets see "dumping" as beneficial for consumers and believe that protectionism to prevent it would have net negative consequences. Advocates for workers and laborers however, believe that safeguarding businesses against predatory practices, such as dumping, help alleviate some of the harsher consequences of free trade between economies at different stages of development (see protectionism)."

Wikipedia goes on to state:

"A standard technical definition of dumping is the act of charging a lower price for a good in a foreign market than one charges for the same good in a domestic market. This is often referred to as selling at less than 'fair value.' Under the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement, dumping is condemned (but is not prohibited) if it causes or threatens to cause material injury to a domestic industry in the importing country."

Anyway, in the federal register, which I read somewhere is like the newspaper for the US government, they have been listing the results of several administrative reviews this week on the items aforementioned. Basically it appears that the purpose of these adminstrative evaluations is to determine tariff amounts, or assessments on producers of the iterms that could be "dumped" into the US economy.

Smart People Really Do Think Faster: I Don't Think So!

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102169531

Well this is an interesting story that just aired on NPR. It contains some beautiful visualizations of the brain. But, I have to say that my initial reaction is that speed alone is not what makes people smart, although I'm sure smart people do think faster.

Think about it. If you have just the tiniest bit of craziness in your brain, and you think faster, that has to exponentially increase your chances of being totally crazy. It cannot be speed that makes one intelligent, because speed would just create a mass of chaos in your head.

Instead, it has to be the right kind of speed with the right kind of information. There has to be the ability to sort information, slow some of it down, and stop some of it completely.

So now I'm wondering if, like, bi-polar individuals and/or schizophrenics are people whose brains have great speed without the ability to slow or stop or erase the information we need to in order to not have hallucinations and/or paranoia. I've read lots of stuff that says artistic and/or creative people have been known to also be a little bit crazy. (I mean crazy in a loving way, not a derogatory way).

Probably, the creative crazies are just really smart people, with fast brain speeds, who don't enjoin certain kinds of information from traveling throughout their heads.

It reminds me a lot of the Internet, because the Internet lets good stuff proliferate, but it also lets crazy, bad, insane, wrong, and illegal stuff proliferate too.

JK Rowling leads fight against free books site Scribd

From guaridian.co.uk, "The publishers of bestselling authors JK Rowling, Aravind Adiga and Ken Follett have been shocked by the news that their authors' latest books are available to read for free on a US website. Internet users can not only read free copies of The Tales of Beedle the Bard, The White Tiger and World Without End at Scribd.com, but also download the text onto their computers to edit as they see fit."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/mar/30/scribd-rowling-free-book-outrage

Amicus Curiae

and, an excellent example of an Amicus Curiae Brief: http://www.citmedialaw.org/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2009-03-24-Amicus%20Curiae%20Brief.pdf

--the brief contains an *excellent* review of literature, I mean case law, that illustrates first amendment rights in the U.S..

Citizen Media Law Project and Cyberlaw Clinic Lead Amicus Effort Promoting Rights of Anonymous Online Speakers in Illinois

"Cambridge, MA - March 25, 2009 - In a case involving important First Amendment rights, the Citizen Media Law Project ("CMLP") joined a number of media and advocacy organizations, including Gannett Co., Inc., Hearst Corporation, Illinois Press Association, Online News Association, Public Citizen, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and Tribune Company, in asking an Illinois appellate court to protect the rights of anonymous speakers online by imposing procedural safeguards before requiring that their identities be disclosed."

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/newsroom/CMLP_Maxon-v-Ottawa

[Today] The Wikipedia Revolution

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/events/webofideas/2009/03/wikipediarevolution

From the Berkman Center: "The Wikipedia Revolution is the first narrative account of the remarkable success story of the "encyclopedia anyone can edit." Andrew Lih, a Wikipedia editor/administrator, academic and journalist, tells how the Internet's free culture community inspired its creation in 2001, and how legions of volunteers have emerged to create over 10 million articles in over 50 languages. The book recounts colorful behind-the-scenes stories of how obsessive map editors, automated software robots and warring factions have come to shape a complex online community of knowledge gatherers. Learn about the historical underpinnings of Wikipedia, of how a Hawaiian vacation and a fringe piece software from Apple Computer inspired the wiki concept, and realized the original read-and-write capabilities of the Tim Berners-Lee's World Wide Web. While Wikipedia has become firmly planted at the top of Google's search results, what are the challenges as sum of all human knowledge becomes more complete, and its problem is not growth, but reliability? Should we be putting so much trust in a resource created by anonymous nobodies?"

Internet filter list of porn exposed

In Austrailia: "THE Rudd Government's plans for a nationwide internet filter are in jeopardy after its top-secret blacklist of banned web pages was leaked."

The comments attached to this article are spectacular.

http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,25214571-15306,00.html

Orphan Works Act

http://www.copyright.gov/orphan/

Legislation is pending in Congress that would ease the “orphan works” problem - this is a nice summary.

China’s complicated internet culture

http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2009/03/03/chinas-complicated-internet-culture/

The Epidictic Genre: "After listening to the speaker, they merely applauded and went away"

Here is a quote I found from Perelman & Olbrechts-Tyteca (1971) that is so apropos to my life at the present moment, and the lives of many others for that matter; I do not want to explain more:

"A single orator, who often did not even appear in public, but merely circulated his written composition, made a speech, which no one opposed, on topics which were apparently uncontroversial and without practical consequences. Whether it be a funeral eulogy, the eulogy of a city for the benefit of its inhabitants, or a speech on some subject devoid of current interest, such as the praise of a virtue or of a god, the audience, according to the theoreticians, merely played the part of spectators.

After listening to the speaker, they merely applauded and went away" (p. 48)