Category Archives: Uncategorized

On 1/11 (or for you EU types, on 11/1) at 111 Minna, San Francisco, the fabulous EFF will celebrate its 16th Birthday. 16 is a weird birthday to celebrate (for either man or legal entity), but celebrating EFF is not in any way weird.

DJ Ripley and Kid Kameleon will be keeping the dancefloor hopping all night long. EFFers will also be on hand to briefly recap the year in digital rights, and we’ll be receiving a very generous birthday present from Scott Beale of Laughing Squid.

A $20 donation gets you in the door. No one will be turned away for lack of funds, and all proceeds go toward our work defending your digital freedom.

This fundraiser is open to the general public. 21+ only, cash bar.

Please RSVP to events (at ) eff.org or on Upcoming.org.

Continue reading →

So after a cool couple years run, my column is leaving Wired. This is the last regular read. (Appropriately enough, given the topic, the title is totally misleading. But I didn’t write the titles, and it will be fun to see all those who only read the title responding to this: “I blew it on Microsoft”). More on the general state of my reorganization as soon as this site gets its intended reorganization. That’s been in the works for months, with the help of a (plainly overworked) volunteer. But I’m really hopeful to have something to present soon.

But meanwhile, check out Wired Science Wednesday evening. It got a great review on Bloomberg, and the very best at Wired is behind it. Continue reading →

So very very close … Just click the image and help close the gap. Continue reading →

There’s a storm raging about NBC’s refusal to run ads for the Dixie Chicks’ new movie, Shut Up and Sing. As the Washington Post reports, NBC told the ad agency, the network would not run the ads because “they are disparaging of President Bush.”

This is nothing new for NBC. In August, 2004, I wrote about an attempt by filmmaker Robert Greenwald to license a 1 minute clip from Meet the Press, in which the President explained his reasons for going to war. Greenwald was denied the permission, his agent told they could not use it because the clip was “not very flattering to the president.”

At that time, a lawyer from NBC protested to me that what I had written was not true. I asked how he knew that. I had interviewed the woman who had spoken to the NBC permissions person. I had known her independently of this incident. I knew her to be an honest person. So how did he know she was lying?

Because she must be lying, I was told. NBC would never do anything like this.

Right. Never. Except at least twice. Continue reading →

More from Eric @ CC:

There are two CC Salon events happening this week. One in San Francisco — which will double as the launch party for Creative Commons’ annual fundraising campaign — and one in New York.

CC Salon, San Francisco will take place on Wednesday, October 11, from 6-9pm at Shine (1337 Mission Street, between 9th and 10th Streets). It will feature presentations by David Pescovitz (MAKE, Boing Boing, Institute for the Future), Micki Krimmel (Revver), and Ryan Junell (Webzine, Sagan, SLOMO Video), as well as music by Evolution Control Committee. This event marks the beginning of Creative Commons’ annual fundraising campaign, so don’t hesitate to bring your checkbook (or PayPal login info — we’ll have laptops on hand) to show your support for the work we do. This is your chance to donate a few bucks and be the first person on your block to get the brand new CC t-shirt design.

CC Salon, New York will take place on Friday, October 13, from 8-10pm at Nublu (162 Ave. C, between 4th and 5th Streets). It will feature presentations by Marisa Olson (Rhizome.org) and Paul Slocum (Tree Wave).

About CC Salon: CC Salon is a series of free events focused on conversation, presentations, and performances from people or groups who are developing projects that relate to open content and/or software. Please invite your friends, colleagues, and anyone you know who might be interested in drinks and discussion. There are now CC Salons happening in San Francisco, Toronto, Berlin, Beijing, Warsaw, Seoul, Johannesburg, and New York.

Continue reading →

Allen Sandquist is a photographer. He has a Flickr account. His photos are posted on the Flickr account under a CC Attribution-NonCommercial license. More than 8 months ago, he posted this very cool photo on his site:

The image generated a bunch of great comments.

Two weeks ago, Allen posted a comment about this picture:

That was published in AutoWeek on July 24, 2006. As you’ll notice, the second is a derivative of the first.

Allen wrote AutoWeek the following:

Hello Mr. Ross,

I’m a freelance photographer in Henderson, Nevada. A couple of nights ago, I was searching the web and found that a photograph that I had taken, was used by AutoWeek in the July 24, 2006 issue (“This Week’s Sign The Automotive Apocalypse Is Nigh”, see attached pictures). I was never contacted for permission to publish this picture and was not given credit as the photographer. I usually charge $250-$500 for commercially used images. I believe $250.00 would be sufficient for this example.

I am a fan of AutoWeek as my barber subscribes to the magazine. The articles are informative and the pictures are great.

AutoWeek’s Mir. Ross responded:

Mr. Sandquist, this image was obtained through the savethe76ball.com uncredited and in public domain. Our customary payment for this type of shot is $50.

A friend of Allen then tried to intervene by writing to AutoWeek. Mr. Ross again replied to Allen:

At this point I am advised that I must see a Copy Right Registration for the photo in question before any payment can be considered.

Ok, so where’s Jack Valenti when you need him?

First, as the author of “savethe76ball.com” confirmed to Allen in an email, “they didn’t get your pic off our site!”

Second, there is an almost zero chance this photo is “in the public domain.” The only possible photos of the “76 ball” that could be in the public domain (at least without a public domain dedication) are those taken before 1978. I take it few 76 stations were selling gas at $2.19/gallion before 1977.

Finally, as a photo editor at AutoWeek certainly knows, Allen’s copyright in this image does not depend upon his registering the work with the copyright office. His copyright is automatic. So the idea that AutoWeek would say in effect “we’ll pay you $50 for a photo after you spend $45 to register it” is to add insult to injury.

Mr. Ross needs some educating at least about decency, and perhaps about copyright law (though I suspect he knows well enough that what he did here was wrong). The license Allen published his photo under says (1) don’t use this for commercial purposes without asking me, and (2) give me credit. AutoWeek did neither. Perhaps others would like to help Mr. Ross understand why that’s just wrong. He’s at kross at crain dot com. Continue reading →

From Boing Boing: “Last week, I received the most remarkable letter from Jamie, a US Navy seaman stationed on a ship in the Mediterranean Sea …” Continue reading →

So 25 minutes after I posted the post below about Balkin’s book (saying “nothing could make me happier”), the Supreme Court of New Jersey decided the appeal in the case I argued (more than 18 months ago). It is here. My client won. Ok, you’re right, NJ SCt. I’m happier. Continue reading →

One of the greatest moments in my career was when I got to introduce David Byrne at Wired’s Creative Commons Concert in New York. At that September 2004 event, we announced that David Byrne and Brian Eno intended to re-release their seminal Bush of Ghosts album with tracks available for remix under a CC license. A couple of months ago, the Bush of Ghosts remix contest launched with the component tracks of two songs available under CC for remix. So far more than 170 remixes have been submitted to this extraordinary site. I’m sure I’ll get in trouble for this, but as Byrne has always been an inspiration to me — long before I knew anything about copyright — I must confess nothing else in the history of CC has meant more to me. Pitchfork has a great new interview with Byrne on Bush of Ghosts, as well as his other cool projects (including his own fascinating blog) here. Continue reading →

So Gary Reback, who was one of the important initial actors pushing the government to focus on the Microsoft case, has been focusing on telecom mergers. He’s been pushing what’s called as a “Tunney Act” proceeding (on behalf of a group called “Alliance for Competition in Telecommunications”) to review phone mergers. (The Tunney Act used to be meaningless, but in 2004 was amended to give it teeth. Reback’s case is the first under the new act).

Apparent there are now allegations that SBC and Verizon forced the deals through DoJ when the designee for head of antitrust was on Senatorial hold for too activist an enforcement bent. DoJ cleared the deals and the hold was lifted. DoJ then ignored the amended Tunney Act and let the companies close the deals even before the judge did the Tunney Act review.

This is sleazy stuff, and it forms the real basis for being concerned about the games the network owners would play if free to play games. The really striking part of this (to me, a constitutionalist) is how the legislative branch keeps passing laws that the executive branch just ignores. And why ignore the laws? Corporate influence. That’s what this case reeks of.

The key briefs in the filing are here:

Memo in support of ACTel’s notion to be Amicus (see especially 7-15)

Supplemental brief (see especially 7, 11)

Gov’t Reply

ACTel’s reply

I can’t say anything about the ultimate merits here, though I do know Reback and respect him, and if had to bet, would bet with him. BUt the allegations here are exactly the stuff that motivates the Net Neutrality movement. Continue reading →