PBS and Google encouraging voting video

YouTube, PBS urge people to record voting (Silicon Valley)

In what must be an effort to combat voter intimidation, PBS and Google are encouraging voters to discretely record their experiences and upload them to a YouTube channel. PBS will air the best ones, I assume, after the election.

The YT channel page also links to the Citzen Media Law Project (a cool Drupal site, I might add). The law of recording around a poling place could be dicy, although the idea of a voter recording their own experience has never really been addressed.

This could be one to watch.

In Defense of Piracy indeed

Larry Lessig writes preview of his new book in a Wall Street Journal column this weekend. Lessig makes some bold and compelling statements for one who is working less in the realm of copyright. Many of his arguments are actually near to the work I am doing on my dissertation–it’s nice to be in good company 🙂

A few points are worth further comment:

“We could craft copyright law to encourage a wide range of both professional and amateur creativity, without threatening Prince’s profits.” …I like this argument for a balance in the law where professional creative-types are still able to profit, while still loosening control for equally valuable amateur copying.

“Peer-to-peer file sharing is the enemy in the “copyright wars.” Kids “stealing” stuff with a computer is the target. The war is not about new forms of creativity, not about artists making new art.” …another great distinction between replacement copying (which carries an economic harm) and profitless but creative amateur creativity.

“Our kids live in an age of prohibition, where more and more of what seems to them to be ordinary behavior is against the law. They recognize it as against the law. They see themselves as “criminals. … That recognition is corrosive. It is corrupting of the very idea of the rule of law” …it’s not in the article, but gobs of theory and research can back up Lessig’s claim here.

I’m not sure if Lessig was responsible, but the sidebar with mash-y creations is also a good compilation for the unititiated.  His policy recomendations are not bad as well.  I’m looking forward to the book.

First Amendment Gotcha

A state appellate court overturned an order against a SoCal newspaper, stating that the paper can publish stories about a case in which it is a defendant. This is one of those strange cases where a paper can use it’s strong voice in the community (from which jurors will be selected) to argue on its own behalf. The government (here, the court) is rightly restricted from restraining the voice of the paper–even though it means those on the other side of the case might have a more difficult time arguing in the court of public opinion. The strength of one’s right to speak often results in the restriction of another’s.

Also worth a look is the Supreme Court’s Tuesday hearing on the constitutionality of searches resulting from erroneous database information.