I wrote about this from a NZ perspective recently - more and more laws in all sorts of areas forcing unaccountable private coproration ISPs, hosts etc to take action to effectively censor the internet - its an international slippery slope
http://lawgeeknz.posterous.com/regulating-that-new-fangled-wild-west-interne
"Hopefully other governments will start to move away from economically devaluing positions, such as by focusing on concepts like "crown copyright." "
Just noticed this in Australia - http://www.itnews.com.au/News/234326,developers-retain-right-to-ip-in-government-solutions.aspx
and here in NZ, we have just adopted a comprehensive policy founded on CC - http://www.e.govt.nz/policy/nzgoal
Great to see this inane position from (embarrassingly) *my* Law Society getting international condemnation. A very odd submission and an even odder reaction by NZLS (to remove the submission from its website) after I first picked it up. My blawg on the background here for those who might be interested - http://lawgeeknz.posterous.com/nz-law-society-wants-people-kicked-off-intern
Agree entirely and I'm giving the same advice to my start-up clients. Not only that, but the cost of then defending the patent or taking infringement action is a factor of 10-100 times more than obtaining it and takes many years longer (particularly if you have to do that in different jurisdictions).
Unless you're in the troll business, it's just not viable.
Whether or not it is fair use in the US, this will certainly hearten those in Europe and elsewhere claiming that the Google book settlement gives Google a significant advantage compared to what it had under general law.
It is a strange irony though that various jurisdictions' differing strengths of copyright law in have resulted in Google deciding in the settlement that even though international authors' works are included in the 1000s Google is copying per day, it will not be making those available to international audiences.
Thats the fascinating and challenging thing about copyright - pull one thread of the web here and a fly gets caught over there.
Seems that a lot of comment on this decision feeds off media analysis (which often takes a particular perspective and therefore picks and chooses the quotes to suit). I always like to actually read ALL that the judge has to say and make my own mind up but I've been unable to actually locate a copy of the decision online.
Would be grateful if someone could provide the URL.
(wish people would make a better habit of linking to original source material)
Yes, NBR, who originally reported the scrapping story, appear to have got it wrong. However, there are plenty of people here who would welcome a zero based review of our Copyright Act. In the current environment, there are perhaps other legislative priorities though. As comments raised in your original story, my fear also is that whilst we have a statute that in some areas is outdated, at least there is a degree of balance. Opening up the Pandora's box of a full review means that that balance is up for grabs again by the highest bidders.
Personally, if we are going to continue down the road of ISP intermediation (s92A, 92C DMCA etc) I'd like to see some better checks and balances, and it's about time that NZ at least allowed parody and satire as an approximation of some form of fair use!
I think we are now coming to understand that NBR may have jumped the gun and I think it is unlikely that we will see any move to have a zero based review of the Copyright Act in the near future. As much as I live and breathe IP/ICT and would have a keen interest in such a review, even I wil admit that there are somewhat more important issues for NZ Govt to address at present ;-)
Having been heavily involved in the s92A furore (drafting the TCF code among other activities), I do however share concerns expressed above that a full review would provide huge scope for the existing balances to be skewed in directions that those asking for such a review might not like at all. One only has to look at the US 301 report today and the supporting PR from the rights holder organisations WRT Canada to see how important every international beachhead is becoming.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by lawgeeknz.
The increasing Intermediary role
I wrote about this from a NZ perspective recently - more and more laws in all sorts of areas forcing unaccountable private coproration ISPs, hosts etc to take action to effectively censor the internet - its an international slippery slope
http://lawgeeknz.posterous.com/regulating-that-new-fangled-wild-west-interne
Other countries
"Hopefully other governments will start to move away from economically devaluing positions, such as by focusing on concepts like "crown copyright." " Just noticed this in Australia - http://www.itnews.com.au/News/234326,developers-retain-right-to-ip-in-government-solutions.aspx and here in NZ, we have just adopted a comprehensive policy founded on CC - http://www.e.govt.nz/policy/nzgoal
Not ALL New Zealand lawyers!
Great to see this inane position from (embarrassingly) *my* Law Society getting international condemnation. A very odd submission and an even odder reaction by NZLS (to remove the submission from its website) after I first picked it up. My blawg on the background here for those who might be interested - http://lawgeeknz.posterous.com/nz-law-society-wants-people-kicked-off-intern
Not only that
Agree entirely and I'm giving the same advice to my start-up clients. Not only that, but the cost of then defending the patent or taking infringement action is a factor of 10-100 times more than obtaining it and takes many years longer (particularly if you have to do that in different jurisdictions).
Unless you're in the troll business, it's just not viable.
Google books
Whether or not it is fair use in the US, this will certainly hearten those in Europe and elsewhere claiming that the Google book settlement gives Google a significant advantage compared to what it had under general law.
It is a strange irony though that various jurisdictions' differing strengths of copyright law in have resulted in Google deciding in the settlement that even though international authors' works are included in the 1000s Google is copying per day, it will not be making those available to international audiences.
Thats the fascinating and challenging thing about copyright - pull one thread of the web here and a fly gets caught over there.
Read first, comment later
Seems that a lot of comment on this decision feeds off media analysis (which often takes a particular perspective and therefore picks and chooses the quotes to suit). I always like to actually read ALL that the judge has to say and make my own mind up but I've been unable to actually locate a copy of the decision online.
Would be grateful if someone could provide the URL.
(wish people would make a better habit of linking to original source material)
Just imagine
"...it's irresponsible of the company to both require online check-in and to close down the website for a significant period of time"
Now why can't regulators understand the same logic when it comes to #copyright 3 strikes internet termination!
It ain't dead its just ...
Yes, NBR, who originally reported the scrapping story, appear to have got it wrong. However, there are plenty of people here who would welcome a zero based review of our Copyright Act. In the current environment, there are perhaps other legislative priorities though. As comments raised in your original story, my fear also is that whilst we have a statute that in some areas is outdated, at least there is a degree of balance. Opening up the Pandora's box of a full review means that that balance is up for grabs again by the highest bidders.
Personally, if we are going to continue down the road of ISP intermediation (s92A, 92C DMCA etc) I'd like to see some better checks and balances, and it's about time that NZ at least allowed parody and satire as an approximation of some form of fair use!
False alarm
I think we are now coming to understand that NBR may have jumped the gun and I think it is unlikely that we will see any move to have a zero based review of the Copyright Act in the near future. As much as I live and breathe IP/ICT and would have a keen interest in such a review, even I wil admit that there are somewhat more important issues for NZ Govt to address at present ;-)
Having been heavily involved in the s92A furore (drafting the TCF code among other activities), I do however share concerns expressed above that a full review would provide huge scope for the existing balances to be skewed in directions that those asking for such a review might not like at all. One only has to look at the US 301 report today and the supporting PR from the rights holder organisations WRT Canada to see how important every international beachhead is becoming.