Tim Marman's Loosely Coupled

Browse by Tags

• Advertising
• AJAX
• Apple
• Audio
• Blogging
• Business
• Copyright
• DRM
• Entrepreneurship
• Facebook
• Friday Fun
• Gadgets
• Gaming
• Google
• Innovation
• Law
• Law School
• Microsoft
• Music
• NextNY
• Notches
• NYC
• Patent
• Personal
• Podcast
• Privacy
• Programming
• Rants
• Security
• Social Behavior
• Software Development
• Sports
• Startup
• Tablet PC
• Technology
• Things that amuse me
• Things that bother me
• Trademark
• Video
• Web 2.0

• Being better than free when copies are ubiquitous

  The digital world fundamentally changes what a copy means for copyright. I wrote about this in the past from the legal perspective, suggesting an implied license to reproduce and a greater reliance on other rights. Kevin Kelly has a great post up about the Internet's role as a super-distribution center and how to make money in the face of this ( via Andrew ). Yet the previous round of wealth in this economy was built on selling precious copies, so the free flow of free copies tends to undermine the established order. If reproductions of our best efforts are free, how can we keep going? To put it simply, how does one make money selling free copies? I have an answer. The simplest way I can put it is thus: When copies are super abundant, they become worthless. When copies are super abundant, stuff which can't be copied becomes scarce and valuable. When copies are free, you need to sell things which can not be copied. In other words, money is no longer in the distribution, but "rather... Posted Feb 22 2008, 10:15 AM by Tim with | with 1 comment(s) Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Copyright, Business, Law

• Friday Fun: Hillary's inner Flick

  Tim Lee on TechDirt discusses the copyright implications of this Slate video . The copyright discussion is interesting and worth revisiting next week, but I figured for this edition Friday Fun I'd share the video if you haven't already seen it. (It helps if you've seen Election ). Clever. Posted Jan 25 2008, 08:03 AM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Intellectual Property, Things that amuse me, Copyright, Friday Fun

• Scoble, Facebook and Data Ownership

  I've sort of ignored the whole Scoble/Facebook fiasco, with people arguing on both sides who "owns" the data. Jimmy Gutterman misses the point a bit , because Facebook has already opened up the social graph through the Facebook Platform API. What they don't expose - and why this script resorted to screen-scraping - is any contact information. He paints this as a "lock in" issue, but I doubt that's their primary goal. We already complain enough about the spam we get on Facebook, and I would hate it if someone in my network shared - accidentally or on purpose - that contact information with spammers. So, yeah, I think what Facebook did is a good thing, which seems to be the majority sentiment. Mike Arrington said Plaxo flubbed it and Jeff Jarvis agrees . Loren Feldman called Robert Scoble a corporate spy . Allen discussed how we should approach the data ownership problem . Dare says Facebook is right - since Scoble did not enter any of the contact information... Posted Jan 09 2008, 11:08 AM by Tim with | with 1 comment(s) Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Copyright, Privacy, Blogging, Law, Facebook

• When will the NFL Network standoff end?

  Like so many others , I was furious when I couldn't watch the Packers-Cowboys games a few weeks back. The NFL Network is only carried on satellite which is simply not an option for many of us in urban areas like NYC. For those who haven't been paying attention, there's been a long-running standoff between the cable companies and the NFL network. (ComCast carries it at a premium, but neither Time Warner or Cablevision offer it, free or otherwise). To sum up: The NFL wants its network carried on basic cable packages with channels such as ESPN or CNN, where it can reach the broadest possible audience. Cable companies including Time Warner Inc. say it belongs on a sports package, or tier, where its audience would include only those fans willing to pay extra. I am a huge fan of the NFL and would certainly subscribe in a second. Much like the issues with net neutrality, the problem is that we're not dealing with a perfect market. If Time Warner doesn't offer me the ability... Posted Dec 27 2007, 12:22 PM by Tim with | with 1 comment(s) Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Rants, Things that bother me, Sports, Law, NYC

• Why Notches isn't "Anti-Stealth"

  There's been a lot of discussion about being anti-stealth . A stealth startup is one that isn't telling anyone what they're building and being very protective about the idea. Anti-stealth is the polar opposite - broadcasting everything, from your long-term vision, project status, and even financials. Anti-stealth is, in its purest form, about complete transparency in the business. Being "stealth mode" was in part about protecting the idea, but also gives the impression that the idea itself is revolutionary. In a sense, it's At one point this might have worked, but we realized more and more that many of these companies in "stealth mode" had average ideas at best. Being "anti-stealth" has its own pros and cons. The real value in broadcasting your message is that you'll get feedback and opportunities that would otherwise go undiscovered, as Charlie discovered . There are many benefits I can see being completely transparent. Of course, you actually... Posted Nov 26 2007, 11:08 AM by Tim with | with 2 comment(s) Filed under: Intellectual Property, Business, Entrepreneurship, NYC, Startup, NextNY, Notches

• Professional bloggers get journalist rights

  On August 1st, a congressional panel voted to protect journalists from having to reveal their confidential sources, and explicitly included "professional bloggers" in the category ( via Lena ). This is definitely a step in the right direction. Ultimately, I believe it should be a functional test - if you act like a journalist, you deserve the protections reserved for journalists - regardless of what medium you are publishing into. This is especially important since newspapers are on their last legs and many journalists are learning they can make more money publishing for themselves. Posted Aug 17 2007, 06:37 AM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Intellectual Property, Blogging

• Friday Fun: The perfect car for Manhattan?

  The perfect car for Manhattan - or just an extra from the Transformers movie? Posted Jul 06 2007, 11:23 AM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Intellectual Property, Patent, Friday Fun

• Arguing Intelligently about Copyright

  Dare has a great rant on copyright . A key purpose of giving authors and other content creators exclusive rights to their intellectual property is to enable them to be rewarded financially from their works for some time before allowing these creations to become "owned" by society. This is supposed to be an incentive that enables the creation of a professional class of content creators and thus benefits society by increasing the number and quality of copyrighted works as well as creating a market/economy around copyrighted works. Most arguments against copyright laws are directly or indirectly an attempt to challenge the existence or benefits afforded the professional class of content creators. It should be noted that professionals dominate practically all areas of content creation (i.e. professionally created content is most popular or most valuable) even when you consider newer areas of content creation that have shown up in the past decade or so. It's because of posts like this that I... Posted May 01 2007, 10:36 AM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Rants, Copyright

• Understanding the Cablevision DVR lawsuit

  While I agree with Mark Cuban that the lawsuit is a mistake , I thought it was worth discussing why - from a legal perspective - the network DVR is an issue. Copyright gives the owner a limited monopoly over a few aspects, most notably the ability to reproduce and distribute the work. In a "normal" DVR, there are two points where these rights come into play: a reproduction and distribution in the initial broadcast, and a reproduction when saving to the hard drive. (Under current case law, even taking a digital file and loading it into memory to play is technically a "reproduction", fixed for purposes of copyright). The former is obviously licensed by the copyright holder. What allows the latter is a concept known as fair use . (Remember, I said it was a limited monopoly). There are four factors to determining whether something qualifies as fair use: the purpose and character of the use the nature of the work the amount used the effect on the market for the work None of these factors are... Posted Apr 11 2007, 08:25 AM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Gadgets, Copyright, Video, Law

• Was DRM-free music an Apple innovation?

  Some people have tried to paint the recent announcement by Apple as example of Apple innovating and Microsoft following . Headlines like " Microsoft changes tune on selling DRM-free songs " are simply misleading - none of the technology companies truly wanted DRM, but they were a necessary evil in selling music that they did not own. As I've discussing in previous posts , Microsoft, Real Networks, and Yahoo! were all instrumental in the anti-DRM movement. Most labels seem to get it - these decisions and stratregy are more often coming from the corporate parents, not the labels themselves. In fact, Gates criticized DRM months before Jobs' manifesto a month ago, and EMI had been reportedly been considering releasing DRM-free tracks in MP3 format for awhile. This initially-exclusive deal with EMI simply demonstrates Apple's significant marketshare for purchased music and influence in the market. The mere fact that Apple was lucky and/or powerful enough to convince a major label to do something... Posted Apr 09 2007, 12:59 PM by Tim with | with 1 comment(s) Filed under: Intellectual Property, Rants, Things that bother me, Things that amuse me, Copyright, Microsoft, Apple, Law, Audio, DRM