2002 May 21 Links

(entry last updated: 2002-05-21 23:11:15)

A trip to the dentist for a cleaning today gave me a look at a recent(!) Time Magazine, with their writeup on the recording industry and CD copying.

And the CARP royalties on webcasting have been rejected – there’s a Slashdot discussion.

Otherwise, there’s plenty of news online today that scares the socks off me – and none of it’s from Ridge or Ashcroft. I’m not feeling very optimistic today, notwithstanding the CARP decision – at a minimum, consider joining the EFF!

(5 items listed)

  • Something from the May 20 Time – the inflammatory title says it all: Burn, Baby, Burn – a summary of the state of play in the RIAA vs. CD copying game:

    The very idea makes Rosen go ballistic: “It’s the height of arrogance for Philips to worry about its patent royalties when we’re worrying about the health of the industry,” she says. But if an industry giant like Philips distances itself from copy protection, the whole enterprise could be counterproductive. A logoless, warning-labeled CD is not going to look as attractive to customers as its unprotected counterparts. Besides, who wants to run even a slight risk that a disc might not work in all machines? “We’re hearing that kids have slowed down their purchases of music CDs because they’re not sure which ones will crash their machines,” says analyst Rob Enderle of the Giga Information Group. “The fear may exist even if the problem doesn’t.”

    Other parts of the article discuss the hardware industy’s reponse in the face of CBDTPA et al. – kind of brings back the recent discussions of the Gateway and Apple ads.

  • The Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel’s proposed royalty rates for webcasting were rejected (text of order). The Slashdot commentary is not terribly deep. I’m sure there will be more from LawMeme, GrepLaw and Copyfight. Wired’s Kendra Mayfield weighs in here. And an earlier article from Jane Black in BusinessWeekOnline presages some of today’s events.
  • David Berlind of ZDNet has a scary story to tell about Microsoft, IBM, WWW standards and intellectual property – coupled with a disturbing examination of the differences between what Microsoft tells reporters and what Microsoft says under oath.

  • Noah Shachtman of Wired tells another scary story – this one about using tricks in the copyright law to guarantee ownership of DNA sequences by encoding them in songs – decoding the sequence from the song, if copyrighted, would be a DMCA violation and, instead of getting 17 years of protection, the biotech firm gets 95 (or more, depending on how Eldred turns out).

  • More on defeating Sony’s copy protection with a felt tipped pen – this CNN article includes a picture.