Tim Marman's Loosely Coupled

Browse by Tags

• Copyright
• Gadgets
• Law
• Music
• Personal
• Privacy
• Rants
• Security
• Technology
• Things that amuse me
• Things that bother me

• Stanley

  I just read that Stanley Rothenberg passed away . This is sad news indeed. I took an advanced copyright course with Stanley last semester. His experience is, to say the least, impressive. His knowledge of copyright law was unsurpassed and he was a wonderful teacher. More importantly, as Prof. Patry noted, he was an absolutely wonderful person. He truly was one of the most generous and caring people I have ever met, something evident even in the very short time I knew him. (Interestingly, his son - who I've never met - also went to the same small college ). I'm fortunate to have met and learned from him, and only regret that I won't have that opportunity again. He will be missed, and my prayers go out to his family. Goodbye, Stanley. Posted Nov 06 2006, 10:38 PM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Intellectual Property, Law School, Personal, Copyright, Law

• Cronyism

  A good op-ed today (via Jeremy ) about the nomination of Harriet Miers. Even a star quarterback with years of high school and college football under his belt takes years of experience and hard knocks to develop the knowledge and instincts needed to survive in the NFL. The Supreme Court is the big league of the legal profession, and Ms. Miers has never even played the judicial equivalent of high school ball, much less won a Heisman Trophy. Ms. Miers would be well qualified for a seat on a court of appeals, where she could develop a grasp of all these important issues. She would then have to decide what role text and original meaning should play in constitutional interpretation in the context of close cases and very difficult decisions. The Supreme Court is no place to confront these issues for the very first time. I mean, you would think that after the FEMA debacle he might want to pick someone highly qualified. Roberts was a start. With this one, I'm just speechless. More food for thought... Posted Oct 04 2005, 08:11 AM by Tim with | with 1 comment(s) Filed under: Intellectual Property, Law School

• Unauthorized Propogation Prohibited: IP Rights in House Plants

  David Dailey shares this amusing story about IP rights in house plants . Posted Aug 16 2005, 11:51 AM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Intellectual Property, Law School, Copyright

• Why do gun manufacturers deserve immunity?

  Talk about double standards. A company can be held liable for making software, but somehow deserves immunity for manufacturing weapons ? The Senate is considering whether a bill designed to shield the firearms industry from most lawsuits that result from gun crimes should give children and police the right to sue. Supporters say the shielding legislation, sponsored by Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, and backed by the National Rifle Association, is necessary to protect the gun industry from massive, court-ordered damages that could bankrupt it. The comparison between P2P software companies and gun manufacturers makes a lot of sense to me. Why should we hold them to different standards? But then, logic is moot when you have the NRA and RIAA on opposite sides of the fight. Read the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act here . This quote from the NY Times article sums up my thoughts nicely: "Opponents of Craig's bill say no industry should have that kind of legal protection, least of all one... Posted Jul 29 2005, 07:10 AM by Tim with | with 5 comment(s) Filed under: Intellectual Property, Rants, Law School, Things that bother me

• John Dvorak on Creative Commons: Will this nonsense ever end?

  Derek says John Dvorak reachs a new low in his latest uninformed rant which, considering his past, is quite impressive. John Dvorak continues to impress me with his ability to completely misrepresent issues. He brings new meaning to FUD. Why PC Magazine continues to employ him is beyond me. Like Derek, I don't even know where to start on this one. (Karl-Friedrich, however, does ). I can only echo Mr. Dvorak's closing question: Will this nonsense ever end? Posted Jul 19 2005, 08:10 PM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Law School, Copyright

• Former Clerks Blog the Supreme Court Nomination Battle

  ThinkProgress is launching a new blog to discuss the Supreme Court nomination battle. Most of the contributors are former Supreme Court clerks, including Fordham's own Eduardo Penalver . Posted Jul 19 2005, 01:09 PM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Intellectual Property, Law School

• Legislating IP Blog

  I've recently started writing at Legislating IP , the blog formerly known as INDUCE Act Blog and the brainchild of Kevin . (My last two copyright posts have been published both here and on Legislating IP). This blog has long been in my list of must-read IP blogs (with contributions by Kevin, J. Matthew Buchanan , Chris Cohen , Ron Coleman , Stephen Nipper , Andrew Raff , and Brandon Rash ), so it's quite an honor for me to join their ranks . Posted Jul 15 2005, 11:53 AM by Tim with | with 1 comment(s) Filed under: Intellectual Property, Law School, Copyright

• Linking can be illegal in Australia

  An Australian man have been found guilty of copyright infringement for linking to infringing material, even though he didn't host it himself ( via Furd ). The ISP was also found liable because they did not take affirmative steps to prevent the infringement. I haven't been able to find a copy of this latest decision, but it would be interesting to see if there was any similarity to Grokster's "Active Inducement" test. This article suggests that the site had "authorised copyright infringement by providing links to illegally copied music files" and that "[d]isclaimers published on the site were insufficient to provide a shield against copyright claims". Posted Jul 15 2005, 09:51 AM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Intellectual Property, Law School, Copyright

• The Significance of Brand X: Was Grokster just a smokescreen?

  Stephen Speicher, writing in his weekly column on Engadget, discusses the significance of the recent Grokster and Brand X rulings . I was actually preparing a similar post but have been too busy to fully digest Brand X and get around to doing so. So in my laziness, I'm deferring partially to Stephen. As it turns out – Justice Rehnquist and the rest of his Supreme Court posse are also fans of the ancient art of illusion. When the Supreme Court delivered the recent raft of decisions it deftly used the attention-grabbing, yet rather meaningless, Grokster case to grab the attention of the public. Meanwhile, a second, arguably more important, ruling has quietly solidified Comcast et. al.’s legal classification as an “information service” and not as a “telecommunication” service. In doing so, the Supreme Court has set the stage for cable giants such as Comcast to, with impunity, disallow such competitive services as Vonage , Skype , and even perhaps Akimbo , MovieLink , and a host of IPTV services... Posted Jul 08 2005, 03:24 AM by Tim with | with 2 comment(s) Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Law School

• Supreme Court Vacancy: Justice O'Connor resigns

  Well, it looks like Bush will get to appoint a Supreme Court Justice . Justice O'Connor just announced her resignation . Of course, SCOTUSblog has a good roundup .. This is to inform you of my decision to retire from my position as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, effective upon the nomination and confirmation of my successor. It has been a great privilege indeed to have served as a member of the court for 24 terms. I will leave it with enormous respect for the integrity of the court and its role under our constitutional structure. Although she was considered a conservative, she's always been quite pragmatic, especially when it comes to women's rights. The power I exert on the court depends on the power of my arguments, not on my gender. There is also reason to believe, based on her questions at oral arguments, that she had a big role to play in the active inducement test created in Monday's Grokster opinion. (I'll get my thoughts down on this one here over... Posted Jul 01 2005, 07:50 AM by Tim with | with 3 comment(s) Filed under: Intellectual Property, Law School