Tim Marman's Loosely Coupled

Browse by Tags

• Copyright
• Gadgets
• Music
• Rants
• Security
• Things that amuse 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

• 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

• Grokster Reversed in Unanimous Decision

  Some bad news from SCOTUS(Blog). The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that developers of software violate federal copyright law when they provide computer users with the means to share music and movie files downloaded from the internet. Read Justice Souter's opinion . Justice Ginsburg concurrence (joined by the Chief Justice and Justice Kennedy); and Justice Breyer's concurrence , joined by Justices Stevens and O'Connor. I haven't had a chance to give them a thorough review, but at first glance it looks like they are adopting something along the lines of the "Active Inducement" test suggested by Justice O'Connor at oral arguments. Ernest is participating in a Grokster Roundtable . Others, including Prof Felten, are participating in SCOTUSblog discussions . Marty has some commentary and Kevin has a good roundup . And don't forget, even though it's a unanimous decision, Fred says we've already won . Plenty of good coverage out there, as you might expect. An incomplete roundup of additional... Posted Jun 27 2005, 07:46 AM by Tim with | with 2 comment(s) Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Law School, Gadgets, Music, Copyright

• Dell invests almost $100M in Red Hat

  Some big breaking news today that Michael Dell's private investment firm bought $99.5M worth of debt in Red Hat. The actual transaction was in January 2004, just months after Dell began offering Red Hat Enteprise on its servers in November 2003. (I believe they still don't offer the desktop flavor, though I may be wrong). In December 2004, after the investment, Dell said Red Hat needs to lower prices or risk losing customers. The other interesting thing to me, considering I just finished my Corporate Finance final, is the description of a debenture I've seen in most of these stories. Quoted below is the Triangle Business Journal's wording (who apparently "broke" the story): Debentures act somewhat like bonds in that an issuer pledges a fixed return for a stated period of time. Alternately, the debentures can be converted into equity - or shares, in the case of a public company. Dell's Red Hat debentures currently are being converted into equity, according to a filing with regulators. Now... Posted May 10 2005, 08:04 PM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Law School

• Family Entertainment and Copyright Act (FECA) 2005

  Denise Howell says : " According to the L.A. Times, President Bush is expected to sign a fascinating piece of legislation , the Family Entertainment and Copyright Act ." Alex at Copyfight asks (and answers) what, exactly, did Congress propose to legalize , in response to this story with the headline "Congress legalizes DVD Censorship". Ed Felten says : "Let's review. The FMA prevents no speech. The FMA allows more speech. The FMA prevents private parties from suing to stop speech they don't like. The FMA is not censorship. The FMA prevents censorship." Eric also discusses another pillar of FEMA : "The ART Act adds two new major criminal standards: (1) using a camcorder to record a film in a movie theater, and (2) the willful distribution of pre-release software, movies and music by making it available on a computer network accessible to the public." Posted Apr 21 2005, 08:21 AM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Law School, Copyright

• The Paradox of DRM: What is the value of control?

  As a follow-up to my previous post : I think part of the problem stems from the belief that control is the most valuable aspect of copyright. As a result, (some) rightsholders will fight against any practice where they feel control is lost. In reality, as Fred laid the groundwork for in his paper, a lot of the work's value is unlocked only when control is lost. (Hint: compulsory licenses are your friend). It seems to me this is the paradox of DRM. Rightsholders want TPM because they see it as the only way to ensure control. The problem with TPM is that, frankly, it doesn't work. It keeps the "good guys" from using works in ways that would arguably fall under fair use (or after the Grokster arguments, admittedly), but it never really protects against the "bad guys" determined to steal anyways. Ultimately, this drives otherwise would-be customers to software like Grokster. The net result is that control, believed to be the lynchpin in the set of rights, actually has a detrimental effect on... Posted Apr 07 2005, 06:13 PM by Tim with | with 2 comment(s) Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Security, Law School, Copyright

• Clarifying my position on Copyright

  Looking back over some of my previous posts , I realized I came across as a bit of a protectionist. Let me set the record straight: IIAC (I am a Copyfighter), at least by Erik's definition . I'm a big advocate of fair use. I'm not sympathetic with those who just want to get things for free, but I am sympathetic with those who want to use content they "own" as they please. (Remember, I'm also a big gadget freak and a developer). In fact, I'm planning on writing a paper about fair use with regards to digital music for the upcoming semester. The original advisor I had actually suggested I speak to another professor who would be "more sympathetic" to my views than he is. Apparently, I came off as pretty "leftist". That said, I'm also a realist. I understand that creators are not going to just give away everything for free. If they feel like they are losing complete control, they are going to resist fair use tooth and nail. If we really want to be able to use things as we see fit, we need to... Posted Apr 06 2005, 08:13 AM by Tim with | with no comments Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Law School, Copyright

• Come meet up at the inaugural CopyNight

  CopyNight "is a monthly gathering of people interested in ensuring freedom for artists and tinkerers, fostering innovation, and restoring the balance between the public interests and intellectual property rights holders for the benefit of all." Thanks to Chris for the heads up . The inaugural meeting will take place at Bar Nine ( map ) on March 29th, the same day as the Grokster arguments. As Chris and Kevin both mentioned, we will all be there. If anyone else is interested in meeting up, drop one of us a line. Update : Andrew from IPTABlog will be joining us as well. Posted Mar 21 2005, 07:01 PM by Tim with | with 1 comment(s) Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Law School, Copyright

• Did you hear the one about the lawyer and the software engineer?

  phosita points to a post claiming that software engineers are stupid - at least when compared to lawyers. The author's underlying premise is that the legal profession has a high barrier to entry that, in turn, guarantees high salaries. Each step is a filter. For example, only 66% of students finish high school. Fewer complete a university degree. Even fewer are admitted to law school, and even fewer complete it. 30% of law school graduates are going to fail the bar exam, and only about 10% of these students will land a job at a good law firm. Finally, only about 20% new associates in a good law firm are likely to make partner. As a result, very competent people who could certainly serve as excellent lawyers are barred from giving legal advice to anyone (for example, Bill Gates, Richard Branson, Michael Dell, and Rush Limbaugh). Also, the legal bar has an adverse effect on minorities, limiting the number of minorities available to serve as potential judges and legal advocates. But, these... Posted Mar 14 2005, 12:40 PM by Tim with | with 4 comment(s) Filed under: Technology, Intellectual Property, Rants, Law School, Things that amuse me