Monthly Archives: October 2002

the next really important issue

Alot of us have been talking up the importance of spectrum policy, and about the extraordinary opportunity that free spectrum (or unlicensed spectrum) creates for the next great internet revolution. Sarah Lai Stirland has a great piece framing the debate. I think Michael Powell might get this. If he does the right thing, it could be the most important governmental decision affecting the internet in 40 years…. Continue reading

Posted in ideas | 7 Comments

focusing for Shelton

Ted Shelton ends his reply with a nice question: why should the protection for software “be different from copyright property in the first place.” That is the issue on which the only real disagreement lies (the other disagreements are illusory, caused I trust by my own lack of clarity)…. Continue reading

Posted in ideas | Comments Off on focusing for Shelton

GNU democrats

This letter by Adam Smith on behalf of the “New Democrat Network” asking Cybersecurity Czar Richard Clarke to avoid GPLd software deserves a response. Here’s a short one by me. And if you agree, then you should respond here…. Continue reading

Posted in bad law | 4 Comments

still missing the point?

I’m trying to think about other things, but when my Dad won’t stop sending me articles about the case, it gets hard. Today he sent me this piece by Professor Marci Hamilton which concludes that “Mickey has the better of the argument.” But I wonder whether Mickey would have the better argument if the real arguments that we make are considered…. Continue reading

Posted in | Comments Off on still missing the point?

“fair use” (or proof that Aaron has been captured by the government)

Aaron makes the nice point that there should be an analog to “fair use” in the context of patent law. This is actually a point explored by a number of legal scholars, most extensively by Maureen A. O’Rourke in a 2000 paper that does not seem to be online. But he grounds his claim on the “the conflict between these two have, in copyright at least, traditionally been resolved by the concept of ‘fair use.'” Not true, or better, that’s government speak. “Fair use” is one mediating device between the First Amendment and copyright. The Court has never held, and… Continue reading

Posted in | 1 Comment

the father of opposition to extensions of copyright

Dennis Karjala has been fighting copyright term extensions just about as long as anyone. His wonderful page has some of the best material from the beginning of this battle through the case in the Supreme Court. Check out the letter from artist Daryl Hanson about the effects of CTEA on his ability to create…. Continue reading

Posted in | Comments Off on the father of opposition to extensions of copyright

nice point nicely made

Aaron points to a wonderful page by John Mark Ockerbloom at the University of Pennsylvania listing books that are in the public domain elsewhere but not, because of the Copyright Term Extension Act, in the United States. Check out the books you are not allowed to download. Makes me proud to be an alum…. Continue reading

Posted in | 3 Comments

is there any vice in free code?

Dave bravely (given the excitement about Mitch’s latest contribution) defend’s Don Park’s concern that the Open Source Applications Foundation will fuel an “erosion in the sense of value for software.” That is an important and valid concern, but it needs to be kept in context…. Continue reading

Posted in free culture | Comments Off on is there any vice in free code?

On Shelton: blogging to understand

Ted Shelton continues to do web logging credit in his careful and fair reply to my reply to … well you get the picture. And more importantly, he does this space credit for his patience in waiting for a reply. I apologize for the delay, but because his last post has helped me understand and frame this a bit better, the conversation continues…. Continue reading

Posted in ideas | Comments Off on On Shelton: blogging to understand

answering (e) mail

I’ve just finished replying to the more than 500 emails I received about the Eldred case. Despite my con-law musings, it is extraordinarily hard to read these emails without a profound sense of just what’s at stake. Missive after missive describes the burden of the existing system, and how 20 more years of control will stifle creative work. These half-a-thousand emails should be worth one word at least — REVERSED. In a bunch of these emails, however, there were two recurring questions that I wanted to clarify…. Continue reading

Posted in | Comments Off on answering (e) mail