Michael Robertson’s Techdirt Profile


About Michael Robertson

Michael Robertson’s Comments comment rss

  • Apr 10th, 2012 @ 2:42pm

    Radio thinking will evolve as TV has

    When ReplayTV/Tivo invented the DVR concept there were howls from those in TV industry about how it was stealing and would decimate their industry. Now with 10 years of experience even the most conservative have realized that the DVR has been a tremendous boost for the TV industry. Last night during Frozen Planet on Discovery I saw a teaser REMINDING me to set my DVR to record all future episodes.

    Radio executives must go through the same learning curve. Hopefully it will be faster because the DVR has blazed a trail, but it's expected to find some of the same thinking we say in the early days of the DVR.

    http://DAR.fm is a cloud based recording service that has a database of about 20,000 shows all of which are recordable and then playable on demand. WNYC is one of the available stations.

    The biggest threat to the radio industry is other media activities (social networking, games, TV, etc). They'll need all the technology possible to keep their share of people's attention to make money selling ads.
  • Oct 3rd, 2011 @ 3:45pm

    This *IS* covered by the law - DMCA 512A

    The DMCA provides immunity to caching servers. See 512 B (System Caching) which reads in part:

    A service provider shall not be liable for monetary relief, or, except as provided in subsection (j), for injunctive or other equitable relief, for infringement of copyright by reason of the intermediate and temporary storage of material on a system or network controlled or operated by or for the service provider in a case in which
  • Nov 19th, 2010 @ 10:15am

    What California law is


    The California public records act requires ALL documents to be provided to citizens when requested. It's not up to the government entity to decide if there's a reason to deny the request.

    Here's some quotes from a case that went all the way to the California Supreme Court:

    To the extent some public employees may expect their salaries to remain a
    private matter, that expectation is not a reasonable one and is, accordingly, entitled to diminished weight in the balancing test we apply under section 6254, subdivision.

    And this:

    We conclude that public employes do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the amount of their salaries.

    And finally:

    The disclosure of such information under the Act does not violate the right of privacy under the California Constitution.

    I'm not sure how it could be any more clear that a right to privacy, at least when it comes to salary information, is not a valid exception to avoid complying with a California Public Records Act. Similarly, there is nothing in the law or ruling to suggest government employees with $99,999.99 salaries are entitled to a different or greater right of privacy than someone making $100,000 per year or more.

    My belief is that citizens should know where every dollar of their money is being spent. If they don't, then it will be impossible for them to police their government.

    Those gulping tax money continue to work hard to block scrutiny. Here's a legal battle in my home town of San Diego happening right now: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/nov/19/a-need-for-pensioner-privacy/

    -- MR
  • Nov 19th, 2010 @ 10:05am

    Re: Hard to take him seriously


    I had no affiliation with any napstersucks.com site whatsoever so I think you have bad data. I have no idea who registered napstersucks.com but it definitely wasn't me or anyone that I knew or was affiliated with in any way.

    Why would I create a site to give myself an award? That would be lame. I think most awards are typically ego stroking exercises and of little value. This includes bogus honorary PhDs, names on buildings (especially those which you paid to get!), etc.

    -- MR


This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it