By , January 27, 2012.

The Truth Behind Google’s Copyright-Bills Hysteria — Great piece on the hyperbole that became the norm over recent legislation. “The tech industry has demonstrated great political clout through the mobilization of its users and fan base; and the industry lobby, led by Google, will say and do pretty much anything to advance its commercial interests.”

The MTP Interview: Indie Film Maker David Newhoff — Chris Castle sits down with the creator of Gone Elvis and talks about indie filmmaking and the challenges and opportunities provided by the internet.

Wright & Diveley on Expert Agencies & Generalist Judges — When Senator Wyden announced the OPEN Act, he announced that one of its advantages was putting the adjudication of sites dedicated to piracy “in the hands of the International Trade Commission – versus a diversity of magistrate judges not versed in Internet and trade policy.” But is this an advantage? This new paper examines the general claim that administrative judges produce better decisions than generalist judges. The conclusion: “there is little empirical basis” for these claims.

Academic publishing is full of problems; lets get them right — The Copyright Librarian (Nancy Sims of the Univ of Minnesota) gives a comprehensive overview of how academic database JSTOR works, along with a look at some of the challenges facing academic publishing. Great read.

Creative Commons for Music: What’s the Point? — “Without a real enforcement mechanism, CC licenses are all little more than labels, like the garment care hieroglyphics mandated by the Federal Trade Commission in the United States … The practical value of CC seems to be concentrated in business-to-business content licensing agreements, where corporations need to take more responsibility for observing licensing terms and CC’s ready-made licenses make it easy for them to do so.”

The Summers’ Tale — Nicholas Carr rebuts recent statements by former Harvard president Lawrence Summers concerning 21st century learning. “This idea that knowledge can be separated from facts – that we can know without knowing – really needs to be challenged before it gains any further currency.”

Who is the A$%#hole? — Music information researcher Paul Lamere, who has long done exciting work in the field, remarks on yet another “enlightened” blog post in the wake of SOPA called Can we kill the music business too? Says Lamere, “James is certainly right – you can’t have a great music startup without great music, but he goes off the rails if he thinks that companies protecting themselves from theft infringement are assholes. A music startup, or any business should not be able to build a business on top of  someone else’s IP without compensating them for the use. It is easy to build a company that makes money by giving away someone else’s property. But it is not legal.”


  1. ‘But the reason so many people were disposed to dislike the copyright bills, and their knowledge of what was actually in them, are two different things. What moved them to act on their dislike was yet another. For these parts of the story we have to look to the tech industry lobby, and Google most importantly. It was Google that floated the canard that passage of the bills would forever change “the Internet as we’ve known it.””

    Can someone PLEASE tell this person that Google put their “skin in the game” quite late compared to the social sites that fought GoDaddy, changed Paul Ryan’s mind, and exposed SOPA 1.0 for being a really bad bill? Can someone also tell this guy the hearings were a one sided bluster of people that knew NOTHING about what was in the bills, nor how this would affect the economy?

  2. You may wish to consider perusing the article at:

    It is not that I agree or disagree. It is that I find the article quite interesting, and I believe you will as well.

    • Good article. There’s a lot of them out there now. Everybody knows how the masses were controlled by lies on this issue. Nobody is fooled.

      • 14 million people were lied to, hence the new restored interest in copyright law’s flaws…

        Good to know.

        • You would be well advised to at least read the linked article before making broad-brush comments. It might give you food for thought, which is a good thing in any debate.

          • I did read the article. My comment was directed squarely at Kent’s wry dismissal of people who opposed the bill.

          • LOL

            People that “opposed” the bill didn’t even know what they were protesting. Nobody read the bill.

            Keep pretending we don’t know how you manipulated people. It was duly noted.

          • Keep pretending you know what you’re talking about Kent. I find it amusing you’ve yet to prove your assertion.

  3. It seems that the Scottish Organic Producers Association has been getting a lot of vicious online abuse recently. Why? Think about it. There’s a reason for the term ‘freetard’.

  4. Just thought I’d post this link in case Terry doesn’t see it elsewhere:

    It neatly disposes of daft conspiracy theories abiut Megaupload.