Catching up

Catching up on the news feed today. It seems to take so much longer when there’s lots of interesting stuff to read.

The bill is intended to “promote competition, to facilitate trade, and to ensure competitive and non-discriminatory access to the Internet.”

It does so by outlawing discriminatory fees for providing content, applications, or services over the ‘Net. Internet providers also have to interact fully with the networks of their competitors and provide equal access to all users and any devices they wish to put on the network. Network providers would be allowed to provide favored service to specific types of data but, if they do, they have to provide that same favoritism to anybody transmitting the data, and couldn’t charge for it.

  • FCC 2.0: Change we can believe in? (Ars): An interesting overview of what could happen at the FCC should a democrat Obama be elected (here’s a riddle: who was president in 1996?).
  • Chief RIAA Litigator Named Colorado Judge (Wired): The RIAA’s “top litigator” as an appeals judge. This might not seem as troublesome (he’s said to be a top notch lawyer) if the tactic of suing thousands of file sharers weren’t so legally and socially controversial.

Briefly…

New Orphaned Works Act would limit copyright liability (Ars)
Without passing any kind of judgment on our copyright structure, we should realize that “orphan works” wouldn’t be a problem in earlier versions of the law. Shorter terms and registration/renewal requirements would solve this in the clearest possible way.

State Secrets (New Yorker)
I haven’t read the whole thing yet, but I understand it’s a worthwhile overview of a wiretapping case.

Your virginity for Net neutrality (MSNBC)
Um, I’ll let this speak for itself.

The Music Industry’s Extortion Scheme (Slate)
$5 a month conveniently added to your Internet bill for all the music you could want. Aside from the slippery slope to fees for other media, this would literally make music worthless. Where’s the identity in ownership for music you didn’t even have to take time to consider what you want?

Georgia only occasionally on my mind (Patry)
A great catch on the issue of sovereign immunity in the Georgia State decision. Who’s liable in this case? The instructors?

Here, Warren and Cobb focus on the fact that their allegedly infringing activities were done in the scope of their employment. As discussed above, however, the test is not whether the acts were done in the course of an employee’s official duties but whether a judgment against the employee would in fact operate against the state.

Here’s an interesting read on sovereign immunity.

Before they grow too stale…

Three recent copyright stories of note: