Category: Media / Sociology

Strengthen copyright, or else!

Michael Geist points to an article about US pressures on Costa Rica for copyright reform.  Truly unbelievable.

Within Costa Rica, the article reports that the copyright provisions in the trade treaty have set off a wave of student protests over what it means for education. Meanwhile, health officials are concerned that the provisions on pharmaceutical products “would bankrupt the public health system.” The response from the U.S. is important as well. It is delaying market access to sugar from the developing country until the copyright reforms are in place. Until that time, Costa Rican sugar producers will not be able to sell their product in the U.S.

via Michael Geist – U.S. To Costa Rica: No Sugar Access Without Copyright Reform.

A sticky wicket

The Supreme Court may have something to say about cameras in federal courtrooms.

The Supreme Court indicated Monday that it might soon have something significant to say about whether and when video coverage of federal trials is appropriate.

This is a tough problem for the court.  On one hand, cameras might promote transparency.  Yet, once the footage is public and immediate, it will become newsworthy. It’s extremely likely that clips of arguments will find their way into newscasts and onto blogs, and it’s just as likely that things will be misconstrued when taken out of context. Transparency is important, but I can understand if the Court thinks immediate coverage could harm the institution’s legitimacy.

…then again, I’m sure they don’t read my blog.

via Justices Block Plan for Webcasts of Proposition 8 Trial – NYTimes.com.

To Google or not to Google, that is a Juror’s question

Social networking among jurors is trying judges’ patience

The Washington Post had an interesting article about the problem of jurors using the internet to communicate and research outside of the confines of the courtroom and deliberations.

Judges and legal experts are particularly concerned about how technology and culture are affecting jurors and a defendant’s right to a fair trial. The Internet has provided easy and instant access to newspaper archives, criminal records, detailed maps, legal opinions and social-networking sites, such as Facebook, all at the anonymous click of a mouse in jurors’ homes or on the tiny keyboards of their cellular phones.

While the article naturally discusses that judges might warn jurors not to use the internet during a trial, I wonder if other forces might work to combat the effects of this phenomenon.

It has been argued that lawyers have changed their strategies of argumentation in court to fit storylines familiar in public relations and popular culture (perhaps at the sacrifice of linear or logical argumentation).  If jurors use the Internet when they go home for the evening, perhaps there will be a push towards shorter one or two day trials. Perhaps lawyers will begin presenting arguments that are relevant to what is going on outside the courtroom (ie: arguing against media reports).  While the greater impact of these on the justice system isn’t immediately clear, many would embrace the idea of shorter trials.