Just stopping in to wish everyone a safe and happy 2007. Dana and I will be heading out shortly to ring in the new year with a few good friends. See you in ‘07.
Archive for December, 2006
When Congress passes No Child Left Unfed, No Child Without Health Care and No Child Left Homeless, then we can talk seriously about No Child Left Behind.
~ Susan Ohanian
The W3C is celebrating the 10th Birthday of CSS. Though, I’m late, I wanted to at least make a quick post to celebrate the use of web standards.
Sometime ago, I stumbled across this interest article over at WebTVWire, which lays out an interesting case showing a high probability that linking to illegal content is illegal in the US. The author points to three cases which show the precedents courts may use to charge those whom have linked to illegal content with “contributory infringement.” This means that you have contributed to the infringement of some form of intellectual property infringement and are guilty with violating intellectual property protections afforded to individual’s intellectual property (IP).
The three cases are:
- Plaintiff Intellectual Reserve (IR) vs Utah Lighthouse Ministry (ULM)
- Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Reimerdes
- Comcast vs. Hightech Electronics Inc
Each of these cases have one common thread in that they decided that the sites in questions had committed contributory infringement due to links they had posted on their site.
The Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Reimerdes case in particular strikes a very sour note with me. This case involved the program DeCSS, which broke CSS encryption found on many DVDs. However, DeCSS’ goal was not intended for pirating DVDs, although, it could be used for that. It was intended to allow individuals running the Linux Operating System the ability to play DVDs encrypted with CSS.
I wonder how a savvy lawyer could connect these decisions on contributory infringement with the arguments presented in MGM v. Grokster. The Grokster case said that a company could be held liable for infringement committed with its application only if that company marketed their product in such a way as to promote its use as an infringing tool.
It seems to me that one could defend oneself against being charged with contributory infringement if they used the arguments presented in Grokster, but altered them for infringement. Something like this: If I link to an illegal website for references purposes, say a discussion of the legality of linking, I could not be charged with contributory infringement, because I am not “marketing” that link so as to promote the infringement committed by the destination site, I am merely using it as a reference for discussion.
Just a thought…
The Washington Post has a nice piece on a new video game being published by the authors of the (in)famous Left Behind series of Christian books about the apocalypse.
Players are charged with recruiting, and converting, an army that will engage in physical and spiritual warfare with the antichrist and his evil followers.
I find it interesting that some of those whom lobby so whole-heartedly against violent video games, support this game. Violence is violence folks.
Here’s a photo of Wallace walking towards the camera at a weird angle.
A co-worker of mine at my 2nd job told me this. To make things more simple, I’ll repeat it as if he were telling it to me.
So, a friend of mine’s neighbors ask her to dogsit for them. So, she said, “Sure.” The first day the neighbors are gone on vacation, my friend stops by to find one of their dogs dead! Yes, deceased! So, my friend called her neighbors to tell them the bad news. Their reply is, “Well, we understand; he was an old dog. Could you please take him to the vet?” Not wanting to sound inconsiderate, she obliges. Except for one minor detail: she doesn’t have a car, and this is a large dog. So, she finds an old suitcase to take the dog to the vet with. She hops on the rail system, lugging her huge suitcase. While she’s getting off, some guy sees her struggling and asks her if she needs help. So she says, “Yes.” The guy asks her what’s in her suitcase, and of course, my friend doesn’t want to tell him that it’s a dead dog, so her reply is, “Electronics.” So, this dude punches her in the stomach and steals the suitcase! I guess he got his “just deserts.”
I’m pretty sure this co-worker of mine was not lying to me, but it’s still a pretty far-out tale.
Here’s an old favorite photo from our New York trip last fall:
For a lack of posting, here’s a Wallace photo:
Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it.
~ Andre Gide
Flickr
Last.fm
Twitter
YouTube
LinkedIn
Recent Comments