Richard's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
from the favorites-favorites-and-more-favorites dept
This week's favorites post comes from Richard, who's from the UK, but will hopefully forgive my removing of the extraneous "u's" from the word "favorite."
This is the first time I've done the favorites post, so it is a bit of an adventure for me. I've decided to start with the "Good News" because there was actually quite a lot of it this week.
Firstly, on the legal front, there have been a number of good decisions in the courts. In an echo of what happened to ACS law in the UK earlier in the year Righthaven has been slapped down a number of times, and there is some possibility that this could go further than just losing the cases. There are (as I write) actually three Techdirt stories on this, but the biggest (and most commented on) is this one. The key point about this particular story is that the judge has not just rejected Righthaven for lack of standing, he has also indicated that even if Righthaven had standing they would still lose on grounds of fair use. Sadly the comments on this story are swamped with largely irrelevant arguments, but you can get it down to a small number of useful contributions by selecting only insightful comments.
My second favorite piece of legal good news came early in the week with the decision in New York that safe harbours can apply in pretty broad sets of circumstances. It is really important that the creep of secondary liability is arrested before it gets too far, and this ruling draws a useful line in the sand.
Another kind of good news is when someone who previously had a reputation for IP maximalism takes a new direction. This category contains the somewhat unlikely combination of J.K.Rowling and the Mexican Congress. The Mexicans have apparently decided to reject ACTA, which is surprising, given Mexico's extreme copyright length of life+100. J.K. Rowling's good news is a move into ebooks with no DRM. Given her previous history, this is something to be celebrated.
Of course, it can't all be good, and so I have decided to institute the "Victor Meldrew Award" (for those outside the UK or unfamiliar with the TV character, his catchphrase was "I don't believe it!" and the character saw himself as a "normal man in a world full of idiots"). Righthaven figures in this category too in the guise of a bizarre argument made by "Plessy Ferguson" that the Righthaven rulings somehow threaten Open Source licenses. Clearly the author of this argument didn't understand Copyright law, Open Source Licences or the Righthaven ruling because it makes no sense on any of these counts. Righthaven lost because they attempted to transfer the right to sue without transferring any other exclusive rights. Opens source licenses don't even attempt to transfer these rights. The copyright for each component of an open source system remains with its original author (unless explicitly assigned to someone else such as the FSF in a separate transaction). Finally, Copyright law does not require you to hold the rights to every part of a program in order to sue for a breach of the license. You only need to hold the rights to some of it. Sadly, many commenters didn't seem to understand these points either, so the comments were full of "educational material"!
On a side issue regarding Righthaven's dealings with Stephens Media, it seems to me that the transfer of the right to sue only enables one scenario, which is as follows. Someone infringes on the Copyright (still held by Stephens Media). Righthaven can't sue them (according to the court ruling) but what if Stephens media sues them? Well, they've transferred the "right to sue" to Righthaven - so now Righthaven can sue Stephens Media for infringement of their right to sue! The net effect of the legal knot created by the deal is thus to effectively put the original material into the public domain because no-one can exert the copyright! I'm pretty sure that wasn't the intention of Stephens Media when they set this scheme up...
Another bizarre argument was put forward by a small UK lobbying organisation, claiming that a lack of software patents was damaging the UK software industry. Well, apart from the fact that the UK does in practice actually have some software patents, the logic here was unbelievable and the evidence lacking.
Other Meldrew contenders this week included the Winklevii, yet again pursuing Facebook after only recently appearing to give up and our usual suspects Apple and Disney who seem to think that there should be (is?) one law for them and another for everyone else! Microsoft was caught playing the same game last week - but that's outside my brief! Those who are familiar with Victor Meldrew will remember that the show had its darker side, and indeed finished in that mode. This week saw a "dark Meldrew event" when a woman was arrested by police for filming them from her own property. The antics of the TSA are often in the same vein and would probably win this award quite frequently if it was run every week.
This leads us on to events that are worrying -- but not bizarre enough to be surprising. There's usually quite a lot of this unfortunately, often from Sony who seem to be determined to stop any creative use of their equipment from happening. Abuse of the patent system is another common cause for concern; in this case BitTorrent is being sued on the thinnest of pretexts. Then there is our old friend the copyright lobbyist. The UK variety is in the news this week with an attempt to set up web censorship behind the public's back. The minister concerned, in a move reminiscent of Pontius Pilate, seems to want it to go ahead -- but without (visible) government involvement, presumably so he can give the lobbyists what they want but avoid the blame from the public. US lobbyists have been active too, this time trying to shift the cost of the Herculean task of copyright enforcement onto the public purse. Of course international lobbyists have not been quiet either, trying to get a monopoly on the process of deciding the exceptions to copyright.
After all this negativity, I thought I would end on a positive note with my personal favourites from the "DailyDirt" postings. The sock sorting robot seemed appealing, until I realised that the video is hugely speeded up. So my personal selection here is the post on Open Source Hardware. I've long believed that Open Source software really needs to run on open hardware, but this video showed how the collaborative ideal is extending beyond computing into other fields. Have a look at it. It will cheer you up!

Re:
Given sufficient resources and time (the more resources, the less time) you can break any code.
Provably incorrect. The one time pad is theoretically unbreakable, although practically unusable for most ordinary purposes. Having said that, if you were planning a terrorist attack...
Re:
Not long.
The infamous Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) in the UK was brought in under the excuse of "terrorism" was soon used by local authorities for all kinds of trivial matters
http://requestinitiative.org/2012/08/local-councils-misusing-ripa-law-to-spy-on-citizens/
and eventually to spy on their own councillors
http://raedwald.blogspot.co.uk/2010/11/council-ripa-misuse-to-cost-millions.html
Re: Re: Matthew Cline's Post
This would have meant that Pandora would be liable as the distributor for non-licensed, copyrighted material, and liable for the "up to $150,000.00" fine per infringing copy.
But surely - under their twisted doctrines - not supplying that information would amount to contributory infringement (if anyone else did it of course)
Re:
Read the article properly. The point is that they send information to the government before they release the fix - not before they have the fix.
Plus, following your logic, why not release the details to other friendly governments and major corporate and educational clients?
As things stand they have just told such people to switch straight away to open source - or be hacked by the US government.
Re: If only we had say the 20th 9/11 hijacker in jail before 9/11
If only we had not been so misguided as to create the whole Islamic fundamentalist movement in the first place - thanks to the misguided anti-soviet polies of Carter, Reagan, and Bush (Mk1).
"In the late 1980s, Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto, concerned about the growing strength of the Islamist movement, told President George H. W. Bush, "You are creating a Frankenstein."[33]" from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone
And as I write this it seems that the US is determined to repeat the mistake by supplying arms to the Syrian rebels. Some of those weapons will inevitably end up in the hands of Al Qaeda.
Re: It could
Over the longer term, things will certainly develop.
Not necessarily.
All those failed prophecies (heavier than air flight is impossible, you (Einstein) will never amount to anything, we don't like their sound (the Beatles) etc) are noteworthy because they are unusual.
Other predictions like:
Perpetual motion machines are impossible.
DRM will not prevent widespread infringement.
The next terrorist attack will not be predicted (because it will be different from the last one.
Have a well deserved reputation for remaining true.
Re: Delusions
As happened in the case of the recent fatal attack on an off duty soldier in Britain.
The suspects were well known to the security services - they had even tried to recruit one of them but they failed to predict the attack.
It puzzles me how people who, when challenged about their failure, say "well it's like searching for a needle in a haystack" but then turn round and demand a bigger haystack.
Enemies created by the US
In any case the supposed current enemy was actually created by the US itself http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone.
At the time they were responding to those who they thought were their enemies but who later turned out not to be (at least to the same extent).
The moral here is that you do not really know who the enemy actually is most of the time.
Re: Re: Of course we are the enemy
Let the real public decide what to do, and hold accountable who is at fault.
Unfortunatley that would probably degenerate into
"Let the mass media bosses decide what to do, and hold accountable who is at fault."
since most of the public still listen only to them...
Exposing US Dirty Laundry Is Aiding The Enemy
Exposing US Dirty Laundry Is Aiding The Enemy.
Provided you remember who the enemy actually is.
The enemy is the public.
Re:
It's strange - but, at home, safety trumps democratic rights. However abroad, in Iraq, Afghanistan etc etc it seems that killing large numbers of civlians in the name of "freedom and democracy" is fine.
Doublethink much!
Re: It has been no secret -- Even I've heard it! Techdirt LATE, as usual.
Had your day in the sun, now you're rapidly aging out of the 18-34 year old (physically) category,
So is the average console player. The new 14 year olds are playing "app style" games on their smartphones.
Re: Re:
but they have as much incentive to do the same things their publishers do
Actually not true - their incentives are much more skewed towards avoidign obscurity.
Re: Re:
Kinda like how Sony filed a patent on setting up the sort of restrictions Microsoft ended up implementing
So why aren't Sony suing Microsoft for infringement?
Re: just buy asking the question
just buy asking the question
Did you mean the "u" in "buy" - or was it a Freudian slip...
Re:
Doesn't it all just become like this guy:
http://www.jonlajoie.com/kickstarter
Re: Scrooge saves the world
And for getting results, nothing beats...
The John Lewis Partnership.
Re: Scrooge saves the world
To pursue the first goal, donors must demand results-- real results, not just children's letters in crayon. And for getting results, nothing beats...
Communism - Chinese style...
Re: I have to laugh
I want to live in your world Tim where none of the terrorists exist,
For all practical purposes you ARE living in that world.
The chances of being a victim of terrorism are vanishingly small.
Extreme measures might have seen for public safety during the second world war in Britain - when the bombs were being dropped and killing nearly 1000 people per day but even then wiser councils saw that bombing of civilian targets was at best a waste of military resources and at worst a public relations disaster that only spurred tose under attack to greater efforts.
Thos who say "because terrorism" should relaise that their response is exactly what the terrorists want and playing into their hands.
The best response to terrorism is to do absolutely nothing!
(including the media not reporting on it).
Re: Re:
Learn to think for yourself.
I'm sure I've seen that line somewhere before ..
Learn to reference properly!