GrafoDexia

This site is devoted to copyright and issues of 'intellectual property,' particularly the issue's analytical aspects. It also concerns itself with the gap between public perception and the true facts, and with the significant lag time between the coverage on more technical sites and the mainstream press. For site feed, see: http://grafodexia.blogspot.com/atom.xml To see the list of sites monitored to create this site, see: http://rpc.bloglines.com/blogroll?html=1&id=CopyrightJournal

Wednesday, March 30, 2005

untitled

href="http://www.corante.com/copyfight/archives/2005/03/28/the_revenge_of_sapirwhorf.php">Framing
debate.

href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/resc/html_bkup/mar282005.html">Canada
rejects one-sided copyright reform.

And again: Japanese study by
Tatsuo Tanaka of Keio U. shows that P2P has no effect on sales.

Good
very condensed summary of Grokster. href="http://techlawadvisor.com/induce/2005/03/grokster-coverage.html">Grokster.
href="http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/2005/03/court_conflicte.html">Grokster.
href="http://www.corante.com/copyfight/archives/2005/03/29/supreme_court_worried_about_the_guy_in_the_garage.php">Grokster.
Good account
of Grokster. href="http://groups.sims.berkeley.edu/pam-p2p/index.php?p=71"Grokster.
href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/technology/articles/groksterprimer_033805.htm">Grokster.

href="http://www.medialifemagazine.com/News2005/mar05/mar28/2_tues/news5tuesday.html">The
Pew data, interpreted as a shift from P2P to legal services. It's
an overly-simplistic picture, but it has considerable relevancy to
Grokster: if consumers really are responding to individual lawsuits,
then why is secondary infringement even necessary?

Copyrighting
history.

--Ari

0 Comments: