SNIU. SNIU.

Australian pop star not on legal downloads services yet.

P2P cultural games.

So much effort required to allow free sharing of a speech.

Labels dump their attempt to produce their own online download store.

Running the numbers.

Michael Geist on Canada's equivalent to the DMCA harming medical research.

Apparently MPAA missed a major deadline for something or the other; can't read full story, because I hate registering.

Fired for legal activity. A casualty in the RIAA's unsubtle definition of filesharing. As such things as this and ISP crackdowns on all P2P traffic, are we creating a new kind of orphan work, one which results from ignorance of the details of the law? Confusion can be powerful--self-censorship often takes tolls far beyond what official censorship would truly punish. Witness the Saving Private Ryan cancellation in the wake of the Janet Jackson episode.

P2P and the rule of law. I've been shocked in the past by people who I know are major infringers--to the tune of hundreds and hundreds of movies and thousands of songs, who spend hours upon hours collecting content--argue vehemently that things like pirating only works more than 28 years old (Founder's copyright) would be morally wrong. It's a strange view that argues for acceptance of the RIAA theme of "all piracy is bad for society and thus wrong," even among those who defy the conclusion, "therefore don't share." Another odd example, Penn's ITAs put up posters saying "Your mother taught you to share; your mother was wrong." I always thought those posters were a potent reflection of the weakness of the RIAA's fundamental argument, and that filesharing was a brilliant term, reflecting a need to do a better job of owning the terminology in the debate. "Filesharing" not "piracy," "infringers" not "pirates."
--Ari