Public Knowledge - Policy Blog

Fun Event On Capital Hill Next Monday: I Take On The Neocons On BB Policy

Harold Feld — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:15:24 -0400

One of the fun things here in D.C. is getting to go to events that are (a) informative on issues, and (b) offer a free lunch. Such is the Broadband Competition Panel sponsored by The Technology Policy Institutenext Monday, July 13, at Noon (for details, follow this link).

TPI has a fairly antiregulatory/UofC/”Free Market” bend to it. Happily, the event organizer, friend and occasional sparring partner Scott Wallsten, likes panels where folks get to mix it up a bit rather than panels where everyone agrees.

I'll have a... what is it called again?

Julian Russo — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:10:32 -0400

An article in the New York Times caught my eye last week. Apparently, the name “Dark ‘n’ Stormy” to describe a beverage made from rum and ginger beer is a trademark registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Now, the Times article took a rather light-hearted approach to the issue here, likely because the proposition is somewhat laughable, but if you stop to think about it, this is actually a little scary. Just a few weeks ago my roommate offered me a Dark ‘n’ Stormy, and I’m as sure that he failed to use the two ounces of Gosling’s Black Seal rum required for the legal use of the trademarked name as I am that he had no idea the name of the drink he’d just made was trademark-protected in the first place.

Newspapers...will..find a way...

Julian Russo — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:40:52 -0400

There was a lot of talk last week regarding the proposition that strengthening copyright laws might be necessary to protect news sources from online “free riders.” Even our own Harold Feld chimed in, in this week's episode of "5 Minutes with Harold Feld". The flurry of commentary on this was owed in large part to a post by Judge Posner on his Becker-Posner Blog. The most relevant (and divisive) sentence in the post is the following:

Video: "Censordyne" Ad Mocks Australian Copyright Filtering Proposal

Mehan Jayasuriya — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:27:06 -0400

You've got to hand it to the folks Down Under: they've got a real knack for producing, incisive, hilarious videos that warn the general public about invasive technology mandates. First, there was the Kiwi-produced, "Kangaroo Court" short, which shed light on the (thankfully defeated) New Zealand three strikes mandate. Now, there's this brilliant parody of a Sensodyne toothpaste commercial (embedded above), which was designed to spread the word about a copyright filtering mandate that's been proposed by members of the Australian parliament. The ad was created by the folks at Get Up! Action for Australia and they're currently accepting donations in the hopes of raising enough money to run the ad on a Qantas flight that many members of Parliament are likely to be on.

Tafas v. Doll: Final Patent Rules to be Reviewed by the Federal Circuit

Brian Rowe — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:57:51 -0400

This past Monday, the Federal Circuit ordered a full court review of Tafas v. Doll, the case that is challenging the Patent and Trade Office’s (PTO) proposed rules for limiting patent application continuations. These rules would require that more information be submitted with patent applications that contain a large number of claims. In a friend-of-the-court brief (PDF) filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, The Public Patent Foundation, PK and other public interest groups urged that a decision by the Federal District Court for Eastern Virginia blocking the proposed rules be overturned.

These proposed rules are needed to help reduce abuses of the current continuation process.

Statutory Damages: Quelling Innovation and Enabling Injustice

Brian Rowe — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:02:45 -0400

Last week, the jury in the retrial of Ms. Jammie Thomas-Rasset found that the willful infringement of the copyrights of 24 songs—about 2 CDs worth—warrants the awarding of statutory damages of $1.92 million. That is $80,000 per song, a huge increase over the $220,000 awarded in the original Thomas trial. Given the massive sum awarded by the jury, Ms. Thomas-Rasset, a mother of two with modest means, will now likely spend the rest of her life in debt. At present, it seems that her only hope is a constitutional challenge to the damages award, which her legal team has already filed. The sheer magnitude of these damages has started a debate over statutory damages and whether they are just as currently applied by the courts. In this blog post, I will discuss two situations where these damages are currently being unjustly applied: suits against private citizens and suits against businesses.

Cablevision Decision Good But Music Companies Still Attacking Personal Network Based Storage

Michael Robertson — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:46:46 -0400

You may have read recently that the US Supreme Court declined to take up the Cablevision case. This was where Hollywood studios and some cable networks sued Cablevision for providing essentially a network-based TiVo, where the programs that the subscriber requested to be recorded were saved on Cablevision’s servers, not on the box that sat atop their television. That the Court decided to let the appeals court’s decision stand — that Cablevision was not directly liable for public performances — is a good thing because it’s a ray of hope that lets online service providers know that (for now) they’re free to develop innovative “cloud-based” services. Which is where I come in…

Video: Harold Feld on CNBC's "The Powergrid"

Mehan Jayasuriya — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 15:52:55 -0400

Public Knowledge Legal Director Harold Feld was a guest on CNBC's "The Powergrid" earlier today. Harold debated talk radio host Ben Ferguson on the topic of competition in the wireless telecom marketplace and discussed the Department of Justice's recent announcement that it would review the business practices of major wireless carriers. A video clip of the segment can be found below (Adobe Shockwave required):

5 Minutes With Harold Feld: The Newspapers' Lame Blame Game

Mehan Jayasuriya — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 15:15:33 -0400

Lately, there’s been a lot of talk about the future of journalism, with much of the discussion centering on the viability of newspapers and other forms of “traditional” print publishing. What role—if any—will traditional publishers play in the coming digital world? And how might we preserve ideals and institutions that are important to our shared culture and democracy? One of the more radical proposals on the table suggests that we make sweeping changes to copyright law, in order to prop up business models that worked well in the print world but which are floundering in the digital economy. In this episode, Harold discusses these copyright reform proposals and offers up his own modest proposal as to how we might save the newspapers.

The Last Cautionary Broadband Mapping Tale Before $350 Million Is Wasted

Art Brodsky — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:26:36 -0400

Later this week, on July 9, AT&T will largely complete its mission to make irrelevant one of the leading state broadband agencies in the country. The agency is the e-NC authority, an organization created eight years ago by the state legislature to track the availability of Internet services and to push for more and faster Internet service across the state.

The European Commission has recognized the excellence of e-NC’s programming. Companies such as Microsoft and IBM have recognized the agency’s excellence, and Jane Patterson, the executive director, is a world-class expert on broadband.