I as way out of touch on this topic, so I figure that Slashdot will get me started: Grokster/Morpheus Hearing Recap. Donna pointed me to the EFF audio of the hearing — I just have to get the time to read up on it. (And, by posting it here, I know where to start when I can) — Also this link to Donna
University of Rochester is the second school to sign up as a Napster customer, following the ground-breaking move earlier this year by Penn State University. All 3,700 students living in Rochester dorm rooms will have free access to the Napster service and its rich listing of tethered downloads. At present, the school will subsidize the monthly Napster service fee, but it warned that students may well end up shelling out for the program at some point in the future.
“Digital distribution of entertainment media is definitely the wave of the future,” said University Provost Charles E. Phelps. “I am very proud that the University of Rochester will be at the forefront of this emerging trend by offering students easy access to a high quality, legitimate music service.”
It’s not at all surprising to see Phelps pop up as a champion of the Napster service. Phelps chairs a Task Force on Technology for the national Joint Committee on Peer-to-Peer File Sharing and is a member of the Joint Committee of the Higher Education and Entertainment Communities Technology Task Force.
Hmmmm — "Proud" isn’t exactly what comes to my mind. More like "the first taste is free," but maybe I’m just a cynic.
Australian music industry investigators yesterday raided the premises of Kazaa’s parent company, Sharman Networks, and four other Internet businesses, including the offices of Telstra, the nation’s chief telco.
Music Industry Privacy Investigations (MIPI) also targeted the University of Queensland, the University of New South Wales and Monash University.
The raids came after MIPI was granted a court order permitting it to search for evidence that KaZaA is complicit in the illegal trade of unauthorised copies of songs. The organisation plans to use documents seized in the raids in court proceedings
‘Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom…of the press;…’
[…] I argue that the freedom of the press includes the right of any citizen, or group of citizens to own a press. At the time that the US Constitution was written the only means (i.e. technology) for communicating with a truly mass audience was the printing press.
Historically, only the Crown had the *right* to own a press. The Crown might *permit* others to operate a press subject to prior restraint, but the Crown controlled the uses of all presses.
In order to have freedom of the press individuals, or groups of individuals must necessarily be able to own, and/or have access to the technology that physically, and infrastructurely allows he/she/them to communicate with a mass audience.
Thus, it must logically follow that the freedom of the press must include the right to own the means of communicating with a mass audience. […]
My apologies for the dearth of postings. Between the start of the term here at MIT, the initial meetings of the TPP admissions committee and the fact that I’ll be inaccessibly out of town next week, I really haven’t had time to do some of the fun parts of my job! I have a backlog of messages and postings to try to handle before I leave today, and then you won’t hear from me again here (unless I get really lucky!) until Feb 17th (a milestone birthday of sorts for me).
Thanks, and I’ll be back in a week!