|
 |
| technology | |
|
Blockchain’s governance paradoxAt the heart of the issue (as always) is who dictates and enforces the rules of the system if and when things go wrong, according to Lehdonvirta. He echoes a point we’ve long made, namely, that what really matters in these systems is how they deal with exceptions rather than norms.
Source: Detecting (and Stopping) Robot Pirates | The Scholarly Kitchen
Source: US Efforts To Regulate Encryption Have Been Flawed, Government Report Finds – Slashdot Freedom Technologists: Digital Activism and Political Change in the 21st Century (working title), Chapter 2, Freedom Technologists This is the twenty-fourth post in the freedom technologists series. This selection of 30 key texts is drawn from a bibliography published here on 7 September 2015 — and subsequently updated — in which I brought together a large set of (mostly academic) references on a specific category of political actor that I am calling ‘freedom technologists’. By this term I refer to those tech-minded individuals, groups and organisations with a keen interest in the democratic and emancipatory potential of information and communication technologies (ICTs). Freedom technologists combine technological and political abilities to pursue greater Internet and democratic freedoms, which they regard as being inextricably entwined (Postill 2014). Far from being techno-utopians or deluded ‘slacktivists’ (Morozov, 2013, Skoric, 2012), I find that most freedom technologists are in fact techno-pragmatists, that is, people who take a very practical view of the limits and possibilities of new technologies for political change. This reading list is part of current research towards Chapter 2 of my forthcoming book Freedom Technologists: Digital Activism and Political Change in the 21st Century (working title).
Source: Bookworm An analysis on the role of hackers in the age of cyberwarfare, published in the special issue on business and technology of the Hungarian weekly HVG. On the 10th of August, for its 10th anniversary, The Pirate Bay (TPB) released a piece of software called the Piratebrowser, tagged with the headline: “No more censorship!”(Anon 2013b) It enables users who live in countries where access to TPB is blocked to circumvent national internet filters. It is a simplified version of a Tor network-based web-browser , which is used by many who want to stay anonymous and avoid the blocking and the surveillance of their online activities. The Tor network is used by: dissenters in oppressive countries with pervasive internet censorship; privacy-conscious users who wish to stay hidden from the surveillance machinery of spy agencies; leakers and whistleblowers; and users who wish to engage in various illegal activities from watching child pornography to buying drugs. Adobe has just given us a graphic demonstration of how not to handle security and privacy issues.A hacker acquaintance of mine has tipped me to a huge security and privacy violation on the part of Adobe. That anonymous acquaintance was examining Adobe’s DRm for educational purposes when they noticed that Digital Editions 4, the newest version of Adobe’s Epub app, seemed to be sending an awful lot of data to Adobe’s servers.My source told me, and I can confirm, that Adobe is tracking users in the app and uploading the data to their servers. Adobe was contacted in advance of publication, but declined to respond. Edit: Adobe responded Tuesday night.And just to be clear, I have seen this happen, and I can also tell you that Benjamin Daniel Mussler, the security researcher who found the security hole on Amazon.com, has also tested this at my request and saw it with his own eyes. via Adobe is Spying on Users, Collecting Data on Their eBook Libraries – The Digital Reader. Snowden Used the Linux Distro Designed For Internet Anonymity – Slashdot.
“When Edward Snowden first emailed Glenn Greenwald, he insisted on using email encryption software called PGP for all communications. Now Klint Finley reports that Snowden also used The Amnesic Incognito Live System (Tails) to keep his communications out of the NSA’s prying eyes. Tails is a kind of computer-in-a-box using a version of the Linux operating system optimized for anonymity that you install on a DVD or USB drive, boot your computer from and you’re pretty close to anonymous on the internet. ‘Snowden, Greenwald and their collaborator, documentary film maker Laura Poitras, used it because, by design, Tails doesn’t store any data locally,’ writes Finley. ‘This makes it virtually immune to malicious software, and prevents someone from performing effective forensics on the computer after the fact. That protects both the journalists, and often more importantly, their sources.’ The error message that launched this whole investigation. Darrell Whitelaw / Twitter For years now, Internet users have accepted the risk of files and content they share through various online services being subject to takedown requests based on the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and/or content-matching algorithms. But users have also gotten used to treating services like Dropbox as their own private, cloud-based file storage and sharing systems, facilitating direct person-to-person file transfer without having to worry. This weekend, though, a small corner of the Internet exploded with concern that Dropbox was going too far, actually scanning users’ private and directly peer-shared files for potential copyright issues. What’s actually going on is a little more complicated than that, but it shows that sharing a file on Dropbox isn’t always the same as sharing that file directly from your hard drive over something like e-mail or instant messenger. The whole kerfuffle started yesterday evening, when one Darrell Whitelaw tweeted a picture of an error he received when trying to share a link to a Dropbox file via IM. The Dropbox webpage warned him and his friend that "certain files in this folder can’t be shared due to a takedown request in accordance with the DMCA." Whitelaw freely admits that the content he was sharing was a copyrighted video, but he still expressed surprise that Dropbox was apparently watching what he shared for copyright issues. "I treat [Dropbox] like my hard drive," he tweeted. "This shows it’s not private, nor mine, even though I pay for it." In response to follow-up questions from Ars, Whitelaw said the link he sent to his friend via IM was technically a public link and theoretically could have been shared more widely than the simple IM between friends. That said, he noted that the DMCA notice appeared on the Dropbox webpage "immediately" after the link was generated, suggesting that Dropbox was automatically checking shared files somehow to see if they were copyrighted material rather than waiting for a specific DMCA takedown request. Dropbox did confirm to Ars that it checks publicly shared file links against hashes of other files that have been previously subject to successful DMCA requests. "We sometimes receive DMCA notices to remove links on copyright grounds," the company said in a statement provided to Ars. "When we receive these, we process them according to the law and disable the identified link. We have an automated system that then prevents other users from sharing the identical material using another Dropbox link. This is done by comparing file hashes." Dropbox added that this comparison happens when a public link to your file is created and that "we don’t look at the files in your private folders and are committed to keeping your stuff safe." The company wouldn’t comment publicly on whether the same content-matching algorithm was run on files shared directly with other Dropbox users via the service’s account-to-account sharing functions, but the wording of the statement suggests that this system only applies to publicly shared links. We should be clear here that Dropbox hasn’t removed the file from Whitelaw’s account; they just closed off the option for him to share that file with others. In a tweeted response to Whitelaw, Dropbox Support said that "content removed under DMCA only affects share-links." Dropbox explains its copyright policy on a Help Center page that lays out the boilerplate: "you do not have the right to share files unless you own the copyright in them or have been given permission by the copyright owner to share them." The Help Center then directs users to its DMCA policy page. Dropbox has also been making use of file hashing algorithms for a while now as a means of de-duplicating identical files stored across different users’ accounts. That means that if I try to upload an identical copy of a 20GB movie file that has already been stored in someone else’s Dropbox account, the service will simply give my account access to a version of that same file rather than allowing me to upload an identical version. This not only saves bandwidth on the user’s end but significant storage space on Dropbox’s end as well. Some researchers have warned of security and privacy concerns based on these de-duplication efforts in the past, but the open source Dropship project attempted to bend the feature to users’ advantage. By making use of the file hashing system, Dropship effectively tried to trick Dropbox into granting access to files on Dropbox’s servers that the user didn’t actually have access to. Dropbox has taken pains to stop this kind of "fake" file sharing through its service. In any case, it seems a similar hashing effort is in place to make it easier for Dropbox to proactively check files shared through its servers for similarity to content previously blocked by a DMCA request. In this it’s not too different from services like YouTube, which uses a robust ContentID system to automatically identify copyrighted material as soon as it’s uploaded. In this, both Dropbox and YouTube are simply responding to the legal environment they find themselves in. The DMCA requires companies that run sharing services to take reasonable measures to make sure that re-posting of copyrighted content doesn’t occur after a legitimate DMCA notice has been issued. Whitelaw himself doesn’t blame the service for taking these proactive steps, in fact. "This isn’t a Dropbox problem," he told Ars via tweet. "They’re just following the laws laid out for them. Was just surprised to see it." via Dropbox clarifies its policy on reviewing shared files for DMCA issues | Ars Technica. How 4 Microsoft engineers proved that the “darknet” would defeat DRM | Ars Technica.How 4 Microsoft engineers proved that the “darknet” would defeat DRM | Ars Technica. Last night, robots shut down the live broadcast of one of science fictions most prestigious award ceremonies. No, youre not reading a science fiction story. In the middle of the annual Hugo Awards event at Worldcon, which thousands of people tuned into via video streaming service UStream, the feed cut off — just as Neil Gaiman was giving an acceptance speech for his Doctor Who script, “The Doctors Wife.” Where Gaimans face had been were the words, “Worldcon banned due to copyright infringement.” What the hell?Jumping onto Twitter, people who had been watching the livestream began asking what was going on. How could an award ceremony have anything to do with copyright infringement?Bestselling science fiction author Tobias Buckell tweeted: tobiasbuckell@tobiasbuckell Oh, FFS. Ustream just shut down live worldcon feed for copyright infringement.2 Sep 12 ReplyRetweetFavoriteAnd then it began to dawn on people what happened. Gaiman had just gotten an award for his Doctor Who script. Before he took the stage, the Hugo Awards showed clips from his winning episode, along with clips from some other Doctor Who episodes that had been nominated, as well as a Community episode.Wrote Macworld editorial director Jason Snell: Jason Snell@jsnell Ustream just shut down the #Hugos live stream because they showed clips of the TV nominees. Automated copyright patrols ruin more things.2 Sep 12 ReplyRetweetFavoriteThis was, of course, absurd. First of all, the clips had been provided by the studios to be shown during the award ceremony. The Hugo Awards had explicit permission to broadcast them. But even if they hadnt, it is absolutely fair use to broadcast clips of copyrighted material during an award ceremony. Unfortunately, the digital restriction management DRM robots on UStream had not been programmed with these basic contours of copyright law. via How copyright enforcement robots killed the Hugo Awards.Last night, robots shut down the live broadcast of one of science fictions most prestigious award ceremonies. No, youre not reading a science fiction story. In the middle of the annual Hugo Awards event at Worldcon, which thousands of people tuned into via video streaming service UStream, the feed cut off — just as Neil Gaiman was giving an acceptance speech for his Doctor Who script, “The Doctors Wife.” Where Gaimans face had been were the words, “Worldcon banned due to copyright infringement.” What the hell?Jumping onto Twitter, people who had been watching the livestream began asking what was going on. How could an award ceremony have anything to do with copyright infringement?Bestselling science fiction author Tobias Buckell tweeted: tobiasbuckell@tobiasbuckell Oh, FFS. Ustream just shut down live worldcon feed for copyright infringement.2 Sep 12 ReplyRetweetFavoriteAnd then it began to dawn on people what happened. Gaiman had just gotten an award for his Doctor Who script. Before he took the stage, the Hugo Awards showed clips from his winning episode, along with clips from some other Doctor Who episodes that had been nominated, as well as a Community episode.Wrote Macworld editorial director Jason Snell: Jason Snell@jsnell Ustream just shut down the #Hugos live stream because they showed clips of the TV nominees. Automated copyright patrols ruin more things.2 Sep 12 ReplyRetweetFavoriteThis was, of course, absurd. First of all, the clips had been provided by the studios to be shown during the award ceremony. The Hugo Awards had explicit permission to broadcast them. But even if they hadnt, it is absolutely fair use to broadcast clips of copyrighted material during an award ceremony. Unfortunately, the digital restriction management DRM robots on UStream had not been programmed with these basic contours of copyright law. via How copyright enforcement robots killed the Hugo Awards. Fox sues Dish over ad-blocking feature; Dish fires back – latimes.com. Fox Broadcasting Co. has sued Dish Network, becoming the first television network to fire a legal salvo over the satellite company’s controversial new ad-skipping device called AutoHop. Dish, meanwhile, filed its own lawsuit, which asks a federal judge to declare that AutoHop violates no copyright laws. Dish sued not only Fox, but also CBS, Walt Disney-owned ABC, and Comcast Corp.controlled-NBC. The television industry is grappling with new technologies that threaten to undercut the billions of dollars a year that the networks collect from advertisers to run 30- to 60-second television commercials. That advertising revenue underwrites the high cost of producing television shows. Fox filed its copyright violation and breach-of-contract suit against Dish on Thursday in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles. Dish filed its suit in U.S. District Court in New York. “The suit asks for a declaratory judgment that the AutoHop feature does not infringe any copyrights that could be claimed by the major networks, and that Dish, while providing the AutoHop feature, remains in compliance with its agreements with the networks,” the Englewood, Colo., company said in a statement. While consumers with digital video recorders can fast-forward through commercials of recorded shows, Dish’s AutoHop takes it a step further. The screen goes black when a commercial break appears. A few seconds later, the program returns. The service can’t be used on live programming, such as a sporting event, even after it has been recorded. With more than 14 million subscribers, Dish Network Corp.’s new technology may threaten the networks’ ability to continue to charge premiums for their commercial time. Dish Network’s new feature, launched earlier this month, comes at a particularly awkward time for broadcasters as they are beginning negotiations with advertisers over the sale of their commercial time for the 2012-2013 television season. “We were given no choice but to file suit against one of our largest distributors, Dish Network, because of their surprising move to market a product with the clear goal of violating copyrights and destroying the fundamental underpinnings of the broadcast television ecosystem,” Fox said in a statement. “Their wrongheaded decision requires us to take swift action in order to aggressively defend the future of free, over-the-air television.” Dish, for its part, said the new technology was simply making it easier for consumers to avoid commercials. “Viewers have been skipping commercials since the advent of the remote control; we are giving them a feature they want and that gives them more control.” David Shull, Dish senior vice president of programming, said in a statement. “We don’t believe AutoHop will substantially change established consumer behavior, but we do believe it makes the viewing experience better.” Fox sues Dish over ad-blocking feature; Dish fires back – latimes.com. The Russian based “Pirate Pay” startup is promising the entertainment industry a pirate-free future. With help from Microsoft, the developers have built a system that claims to track and shut down the distribution of copyrighted works on BitTorrent. Their first project, carried out in collaboration with Walt Disney Studios and Sony Pictures, successfully stopped tens of thousands of downloads. via Microsoft Funded Startup Aims to Kill BitTorrent Traffic | TorrentFreak.The Russian based “Pirate Pay” startup is promising the entertainment industry a pirate-free future. With help from Microsoft, the developers have built a system that claims to track and shut down the distribution of copyrighted works on BitTorrent. Their first project, carried out in collaboration with Walt Disney Studios and Sony Pictures, successfully stopped tens of thousands of downloads. via Microsoft Funded Startup Aims to Kill BitTorrent Traffic | TorrentFreak. Analysis: Did the content industry lose the legal battle?Do you remember back in 2001 when Napster shut down its servers? US courts found Napster Inc was likely to be liable for the copyright infringements of its users. Many of Napster’s successors were also shut down. Aimster and its controversial CEO were forced into bankruptcy, the highest court in the US strongly suggested that those behind Grokster and Morpheus ought to be held liable for “inducing” their users to infringe, and Kazaa’s owners were held liable for authorisation by our own Federal Court. Countless others fled the market in the wake of these decisions with some, like the formerly defiant owners of Bearshare and eDonkey, paying big settlements on the way out. By most measures, this sounds like an emphatic victory for content owners. But a funny thing happened in the wake of all of these injunctions, shutdowns and settlements: the number of P2P file sharing apps available in the market exploded. By 2007, two years after the US Supreme Court decided Grokster, there were more individual P2P applications available than there had ever been before. The average number of users sharing files on file sharing networks at any one time was nudging ten million and it was estimated that P2P traffic had grown to comprise up to 90 percent of global internet traffic. At that point content owners tacitly admitted defeat, largely abandoning their long-time strategy of suing key P2P software providers and diverting enforcement resources to alternatives like graduated response or “three strikes” laws. Why is it that, despite being ultimately successful in holding individual P2P software providers liable for their users’ infringement, content owners’ litigation strategy has failed to bring about any meaningful reduction in the amount of P2P development and infringement? Physical vs digital I would argue pre-P2P era law was based on a number of “physical world” assumptions. That makes sense, since it evolved almost exclusively with reference to physical world scenarios and technologies. However, as it turns out, there is often a gap between those assumptions and the realities of P2P software development. Four such physical world assumptions are particularly notable in explaining this phenomenon. The first is that everybody is bound by physical world rules. Assuming this rule had universal application, various secondary liability principles evolved to make knowledge and control pre-requisites to liability. But software has no such constraint. Programmers can write software that will do things that are simply not possible or feasible in the physical world. So once the Napster litigation made P2P programmers aware of the rules about knowledge and control, they simply coded Napster’s successors to eliminate them – something no provider of a physical world distribution technology ever managed to do. Remember to sign up to our new Telecommunications bulletin to stay connected with a concise online wrap of Australiaís telecommunications and ISP industry.
In response, the US Supreme Court in Grokster created a brand new legal doctrine, called inducement, that did not rely on either knowledge or control. That rule was aimed at capturing “bad actors” – those P2P providers who aimed to profit from their users’ infringement and whose nefarious intent was demonstrated by “smoking guns” in their marketing and other communications. But the inducement law failed to appreciate some of the other differences that make the software world special and thus led directly to the explosion in the number of P2P technologies. In understanding why, three other physical world assumptions come into play. One is that it is expensive to create distribution technologies that are capable of vast amounts of infringement. Of course in the physical world, the creation of such technologies, like printing presses, photocopiers, and VCRs required large investment. Research and development, mass-manufacturing, marketing and delivery all require massive amounts of cash. Thus, the law came to assume that the creation of such technologies was expensive. That led directly to the next assumption – that distribution technologies are developed for profit. After all, nobody would be investing those massive sums without some prospect of a return. Finally comes the fourth assumption: that rational developers of distribution technologies won’t share their secrets with consumers or competitors. Since they needed to recoup those massive investments, they had no interest at all in giving them away. All of these assumptions certainly can hold up in the software development context. For example, those behind Kazaa spent a lot on its development, squeezed out the maximum possible profit and kept its source code a closely guarded secret. By creating a law that focused on profits, business models and marketing, the Supreme Court succeeded in shaking out Kazaa and its ilk from the market. But the Court failed to appreciate that none of these things are actually necessary to the creation of P2P file sharing software. It can be so inexpensive to develop that some university programming courses actually require students to make an app as part of an assignment. When the software provider puts in such a small investment, there’s much less need to realise a profit. This, combined with widespread norms within the software development community encouraging sharing and collaboration, also leads to some individuals making the source code of their software publicly available for others to adapt and copy. When the US Supreme Court created its new law holding P2P providers liable where they “fostered” third party infringement, as evidenced by such things as business models, marketing and internal communications, the result was an enormous number of programmers choosing to create new applications without any of those liability attracting elements. In the absence of any evidence that they had set out to foster infringement, they could not be liable for inducement, and having coded out of knowledge and control they could not be held liable under the pre-P2P law either. The end result? The mismatch between the law’s physical world assumptions and the realities of the software world meant that the law created to respond to the challenges of P2P file sharing led to the opposite of the desired result: a massive increase in the availability of P2P file sharing software. The failure of the law to recognise the unique characteristics of software and software development meant the abandonment of the litigation campaign against P2P providers was only a matter of time. Dr Rebecca Giblin is a member of Monash University’s law faculty in Melbourne. Her new book Code Wars tells the story of the decade-long struggle between content owners and P2P software providers, tracing the development of the fledgling technologies, the attempts to crush them through litigation and legislation, and the remarkable ways in which they evolved as their programmers sought ever more ingenious means to remain one step ahead of the law. The book explains why the litigation strategy against P2P providers was ultimately unsuccessful in bringing about any meaningful reduction in the amount of P2P development of infringement. Visit codewarsbook.com where you can read the first chapter in full. Physical copies can be ordered online from stores like Amazon and Book Depository, and electronic copies are available via Google books at a heavily discounted price. via How litigation only spurred on P2P file sharing – Telco/ISP – Technology – News – iTnews.com.au. Torrent Stream Magic Player is a brand new add-on that allows users to stream video and music torrents directly in their browser. The Magic Player works with Chrome, Firefox, Opera and supports dozens of popular torrent sites including The Pirate Bay, isoHunt, BTjunkie and EZTV. It’s one of the first solutions to create a true video-on-demand experience directly in the browser. via Stream Torrents in Your Web Browser With Magic Player | TorrentFreak. How it works: – You install our add-on into your browser – If ever Demoniod.com is seized by ICE or the upcoming COICO legislation it won’t matter. – You simply type Demoniod.com into your browser as usual, the browser sends the address to the add-on, the add-on checks if Demoniod.com is on the list of sites to be redirected and immediately redirects you to the mirror site. This happens in microseconds and completely transparent to you (the user). via MAFIAAFire.com.
The Pirate Bay – The world’s most resilient bittorrent site
Gizmodo
(June 3, 2005). Bridgeport Music, Inc., et al. v. Dimension Films, et al.: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. more… (2007). Digital Music Report 2006: IFPI. more… (2006). The Economy of Culture in Europe: KEA European Affairs; Media Group (Turku School of Economics); MKW Wirtschaftsforschung GmbH. more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more… (Mai 2005). Etude D’impact D’une Remuneration Alternative Sur Les Echanges Peer To Peer: UFC – Que Choisir. more… (March 8, 2006). An Examination of Consumer Satisfaction With Commercial Radio in Canada (Vol. 1): Strategic Inc. more… (2006/01/20). File-sharing ‘not cut by courts’, BBC. more… (2006). Monitoring and Identifying P2P Media by BigChampagne Online Media Measurement: SPEDIDAM. more… (1735). A second letter from an author to a Member of Parliament; containing, some further remarks on a late letter concerning the bill now depending in the House of Commons, for the encouragement of learning, &c. London. more… (2005. június). A szerzői jogi alapú ágazatok gazdasági súlya Magyarországon (pp. 121). Budapest: Magyar Szabadalmi Hivatal. more… (April 3, 2001). Testimony of the Future of Music Coalition on “Online Entertainment and Copyright Law: Coming Soon to a Digital Device Near You.” Senate Judiciary Committee (pp. 13). Washington, DC: Future of Music Coalition. more… (December 12, 1906). Twain’s Plant to Beat The Copyright Law, New York Times. New York, NY. more… (2003). ‘Two relationships to a cultural public domain. (Conference on the Public Domain)’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 239(224). more… Adelstein, R. P., & Peretz, S. I. (1985). ‘The competition of technologies in markets for ideas: Copyright and fair use in evolutionary perspective’, International Review of Law and Economics, 5(2), 209-238. Stable URL more… Akerlof, G. A., Hahn, R., Litan, R. E., Arrow, K. J., Bresnahan, T. F., Buchanan, J. M., et al. (2002). The Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998: An Economic Analysis: AEI-Brookings Joint Center. more… Alford, W. P. (1993). ‘Don’t Stop Thinking about…Yesterday: Why There Was No Indigenous Counterpart to Intellectual Property Law in Imperial China’, Journal of Chinese Law, 7. more… ALLIANCE, I. I. P. (2006). 2006 Special 301: Hungary. more…, more… Anand, B., & Galetovic, A. (2004). ‘Strategies That Work When Property Rights Don’t’, pp. 261-304 in G. Libecap (ed), Intellectual Property and Entrepreneurship. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press. more… Andersson, J. (2006). ‘The Pirate Bay and the ethos of sharing’ in A. e. a. Hadzi (ed), Deptford.TV Diaries. London: Openmute Publishing. more… Argentesi, E., Alvisi, M., & Carbonara, E. (2002). Piracy and Quality Choice in Monopolistic Markets: SSRN. Stable URL more… Armstrong, E. (1990). Before copyright : the French book-privilege system 1498-1526. Cambridge [England] ; New York: Cambridge University Press. more… Astbury, R. (1978). ‘The Renewal of the Licensing Act in 1693 and its Lapse in 1695’, Library, s5-XXXIII(4), 296-322. Stable URL more… Atkins, R., Mintcheva, S., & National Coalition against Censorship (U.S.). (2006). Censoring culture : contemporary threats to free expression. New York: New Press : Distributed by W.W Norton. Bakos, Y., & Brynjolfsson, E. (1999). ‘Bundling information goods: Pricing, profits, and efficiency’, Management Science, 45(12), 1613-1630. more… Banerjee, A., Faloutsos, M., & Bhuyan, L. N. (2007). P2P:Is Big Brother Watching You? Riverside: Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of California. more… Barber, G. (1961). ‘Galignani’s and the Publication of English Books in France from 1800 to 1852’, Library, s5-XVI(4), 267-286. Stable URL more… Basho, K. (2000). ‘The licensing of our personal information: Is it a solution to Internet privacy?’ California Law Review, 88(5), 1507-1545. Becker, J. U., & Clement, M. (2003). ‘Generation Napster – Analysis of the economic rationale to share files in peer-to-peer-networks’, Wirtschaftsinformatik, 45(3), 261-271. Becker, J. U., & Clement, M. (2006). ‘Dynamics of illegal participation in peer-to-peer networks – Why do people illegally share media files?’ Journal of Media Economics, 19(1), 7-32. more… Benkler, Y. (2000). ‘An unhurried view of private ordering in information transactions’, Vanderbilt Law Review, 53(6), 2063-2080. Benkler, Y. (2002). ‘Coase’s penguin, or, Linux and The Nature of the Firm’, Yale Law Journal, 112(3), 369-+. Benkler, Y. (2003). ‘Through the looking glass: Alice and the constitutional foundations of the public domain.(Conference on the Public Domain)’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 173(152). more… Benkler, Y. (Nov 2000). ‘An unhurried view of private ordering in information transactions’, Vanderbilt Law Review 53(6), 2063. more… Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks : how social production transforms markets and freedom. New Haven: Yale University Press. Stable URL more… Bennett, S. (1976). ‘John Murray’s Family Library and the Cheapening of Books in Early Nineteenth Century Britain’, Studies in Bibliography, 29, 139-166. Stable URL Bernstein, D. (January 26, 2004). Music Royalties Rise, Even as CD Sales Fall, The New York Times. New York more… Besen, S. M., & Kirby, S. N. (1989). ‘Private Copying, Appropriability, and Optimal Copying Royalties’, Journal of Law & Economics, 32(2), 255-280. more… Bettig, R. V. (1996). Copyrighting culture : the political economy of intellectual property. Boulder, Colo: Westview Press. Bhattacharjee, S., Gopal, R. D., Lertwachara, K., & Marsden, J. R. (2003). Economic of online music, Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Electronic commerce. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: ACM. more… Bhattacharjee, S., Gopal, R. D., Lertwachara, K., & Marsden, J. R. (2006). ‘Impact of Legal Threats on Online Music Sharing Activity: An Analysis of Music Industry Legal Actions’, Journal of Law & Economics, 49(1), 91-114. Stable URL more… Birn, R. (1970). ‘The Profits of Ideas: Privileges en Librairie in Eighteenth-Century France’, Eighteenth-Century Studies, 4(2), 131-168. Stable URL more… Blackburn, D. (2004). On-line Piracy and Recorded Music Sales. Cambridge, Mass. more… Blagden, C. (1955). ‘The English Stock of the Stationers’ Company An account of its origins’, Library, s5-X(3), 163-185. Stable URL more… Blomqvist, U., Eriksson, L.-E., Findahl, O., Selg, H., & Wallis, R. Trends in downloading and filesharing of music, MusicLessons – Broadband technologies transforming business models and challenging regulatory frameworks – lessons from the music industry. more… Bô, D., Claire-Marie Lévêque, Marsiglia, A., Lellouche, R., Danard, B., & Jeanneau, C. (2004 Mai). La piraterie de films: Motivations et pratiques des Internautes: Centre National de la Cinématographie. more… Bokor, J., & Kováts, I. (1975). Hanglemezgyártás és kereskedelem. Budapest: Tömegkommunikációs Kutatóközpont. more… Boldrin, M., & Levine, D. K. (2004). ‘2003 Lawrence R. Klein lecture the case against intellectual monopoly’, International Economic Review, 45(2), 327-350. more… Bond, R. P. (December 1963). ‘The Pirate and the Tatler’, The Library, XVIII(4), 257. more… Borghi, M. (2003). Writing Practices in Privilege and Intellectual Property Systems. more… Bouckaert, B., & Geest, G. d. (2000). ‘1610 Copyright’ in Encyclopedia of law and economics. Cheltenham, UK ; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. more… Bowbrick, P. (1983). ‘The Economics of Superstars – Comment’, American Economic Review, 73(3), 459-459. Bowrey, K. (1996). ‘Who’s writing copyright’s history?’ European Intellectual Property Review, 18(6), 322-329. more… Boyle, J. The Second Enclosure Movement and the Construction of the Public Domain: SSRN. Stable URL more… Boyle, J. (1992). ‘A Theory of Law and Information: Copyright, Spleens, Blackmail, and Insider Trading’, California Law Review, 80(6), 1413-1540. Stable URL more… Boyle, J. (2000). ‘Cruel, mean, or lavish? Economic analysis, price discrimination and digital intellectual property’, Vanderbilt Law Review, 53(6), 2007-2039. more… Boyle, J. (2002). ‘Fencing off ideas: enclosure & the disappearance of the public domain’, Daedalus, 131(2), 13(13). Boyle, J. (2003). ‘The second enclosure movement and the construction of the public domain.(Conference on the Public Domain)’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 33(42). more… Bracha, O. (2005). Owning Ideas: A History of Anglo-American Intellectual Property (Vol. S.J.D.): Harvard Law School. more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more… Breyer, S. (1970). ‘The Uneasy Case for Copyright: A Study of Copyright in Books, Photocopies, and Computer Programs’, Harvard Law Review, 84(2), 281-351. Stable URL more… Brooker, R. (September 2005). Investigation into The Cultural Diversity of Music Download Web Sites, Intertek Research & Performance Testing Technical Report (Vol. 1). London: Intertek. more… Brynjolfsson, E., Hu, Y. J., & Smith, M. D. (2003). Consumer Surplus in the Digital Economy: Estimating the Value of Increased Product Variety at Online Booksellers: SSRN. Stable URL more… Buchanan, J. M., & Yoon, Y. J. (2000). ‘Symmetric tragedies, commons and anticommons’, Journal of Law and Economics, 43(1), 1-13. more… Buchanan, J. M., & Yoon, Y. J. (2001). ‘MAJORITARIAN MANAGEMENT OF THE COMMONS’, Economic Inquiry, 39(3), 396. more… Chard, L. F. (1977). ‘Bookseller to Publisher: Joseph Johnson and the English Book Trade, 1760 to 1810’, Library, s5-XXXII(2), 138-154. Stable URL more… Chartier, R. (2002). ‘Property & privilege in the republic of letters: translated by Arthur Goldhammer’, Daedalus, 131(2), 60(67). more… Chellappa, R. K., & Shivendu, S. (2003). ‘Economic implications of variable technology standards for movie piracy in a global context’, Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(2), 137-168. Chellappa, R. K., & Shivendu, S. (2005). ‘Managing piracy: Pricing and sampling strategies for digital experience goods in vertically segmented markets’, Information Systems Research, 16(4), 400-417. Chen, Y.-n., & Png, I. (2003). ‘Information Goods Pricing and Copyright Enforcement: Welfare Analysis’, Info. Sys. Research, 14(1), 107-123. more… Chesterman, J., & Lipman, A. (1988). The electronic pirates : DIY crime of the century. London: Routledge. Clarke, J., Hall, S., Jefferson, S., & Roberts, B. (1997). ‘Subcultures, Cultures and Class’, pp. xvi, 599 p. in K. Gelder & S. Thornton (eds), The subcultures reader. London ; New York: Routledge. Stable URL more… Claus, P. Danish file-sharing, Piratgruppen: Lessig Blog Archive. Stable URL more… Coase, R. H. (1979). ‘Payola in Radio and Television Broadcasting’, Journal of Law and Economics, 22(2), 269-328. Stable URL more… Cohen, A. K. (1997). ‘A General Theory of Subcultures’, pp. xvi, 599 p. in K. Gelder & S. Thornton (eds), The subcultures reader. London ; New York: Routledge. Stable URL more… Cohen, D. J., & Rosenzweig, R. (2006). Digital history : a guide to gathering, preserving, and presenting the past on the Web. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Stable URL Cohen, J. E. (1905). Copyright and the Perfect Curve: SSRN. Stable URL more… Condorcet, M. D. (2002). ‘Fragments concerning freedom of the press: excerpts selected and translated by Arthur Goldhammer’, Daedalus, 131(2), 57(53). more… Condry, I. (2004). ‘Cultures of music piracy: an ethnographic comparison of the US and Japan’, International Journal of Cultural Studies, 7(3), 343-363. more… Connolly, M., & Krueger, A. B. (2006). ‘Rockonomics: The Economics of Popular Music’, pp. 667-719 in: Elsevier. Stable URL more… Coombe, R. J. (1991). ‘Objects of Property and Subjects of Politics – Intellectual Property Laws and Democratic Dialog’, Texas Law Review, 69(7), 1853-1880. more… Coombe, R. J. (1998). The cultural life of intellectual properties : authorship, appropriation, and the law. Durham: Duke University Press. more… Cooper, M. N. (March 2005). Time For The Recording Industry To Face The Music: The Political, Social And Economic Benefits Of Peer-To-Peer Communications Networks (Vol. 1, pp. 79): Consumer Federation Of America. more… Cowen, T. (October 2004). How the United States Funds the Arts. In M. Bauerlein (Ed.): National Endowment for the Arts. more… Cox, J. E. (1997). ‘Publishers, publishing and the Internet: How journal publishing will survive and prosper in the electronic age’, Electronic Library, 15(2), 125-131. Danard, B., & Jeanneau, C. (Mai 2004). Le téléchargement de films sur Internet: Centre national de la cinématographie. more… Darnton, R. (1982). The literary underground of the Old Regime. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. Stable URL *** DOCUMENT BOUNDARY *** more… Darnton, R. (2003). ‘The Science of Piracy: A Crucial Ingredient in Eighteenth-Century Publishing’, Studies on Voltaire and the Eighteenth Century 12, 3-29. more… Davies, G., & Hung, M. E. (1993). Music and video private copying : an international survey of the problem and the law. London: Sweet & Maxwell. Davies, W. (01 December 2005). Markets in the Online Public Sphere: Institute for Public Policy Research. more… Delacroix, F., Danard, B., & Jardillier, S. (2005). L’offre « pirate » de films sur Internet: Centre national de la cinématographie. more… Demsetz, H. (1969). ‘Information and Efficiency: Another Viewpoint’, Journal of Law and Economics, 12(1), 1-22. Stable URL more… Diderot, D. (2002). ‘Letter on the book trade: excerpts selected and translated by Arthur Goldhammer’, Daedalus, 131(2), 48(49). Domon, K., & Nakamura, K. Unauthorized Copying and Copyright Enforcement in Developing Countries: A Vietnam Case Study: SSRN. Stable URL more… Donaldson, A. (1764). Some Thoughts on the State of Literary Property. more… Dreyfuss, R. C. (Nov 2000). ‘Games Economists Play.’ Vanderbilt Law Review, 53(6), 9. more… Dubosson-Torbay, M., Pigneur, Y., & Usunier, J.-C. (2004). Business Models for Music Distribution after the P2P Revolution, Fourth International Conference on Web Delivering of Music: IEEE. more… Duchene, A., & Waelbroeck, P. (2006). ‘The legal and technological battle in the music industry: Information-push versus information-pull technologies’, International Review of Law and Economics, 26(4), 565-580. Duffy, J. F. (2004). ‘The marginal cost controversy in intellectual property’, University of Chicago Law Review, 71(1), 37-56. more… Eisenstein, E. L. (1983). The printing revolution in early modern Europe. Cambridge [Cambridgeshire] ; New York: Cambridge University Press. more… Eisenstein, E. L. (2005). The printing revolution in early modern Europe. Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press. Stable URL Ewing, J. (September 2003). ‘Copyright and authors’, First Monday, 8(10), URL (consulted Retrieved Date) Stable URL more… Feather, J. (1994). Publishing, piracy, and politics : an historical study of copyright in Britain. New York, N.Y.: Mansell. more… Febvre, L. P. V., & Martin, H.-J. (1976). The coming of the book : the impact of printing 1450-1800. London: N.L.B. more… Feldman, Y., & Nadler, J. (2005). Expressive Law and File Sharing Norms: SSRN. Stable URL more… Fernandes, S. (September 2005). Online Music Download Services, Intertek Research & Performance Testing Technical Report (Vol. 2). London: Intertek. more… Fichte, J. G. (1793). Proof of the Illegality of Reprinting: A Rationale and a Parable. more… Fisher III, W. W. (October 10, 2000). ‘Digital Music: Problems and Possibilities’, URL (consulted Retrieved Date) http://www.law.harvard.edu/Academic_Affairs/coursepages/tfisher/Music.html. Stable URL more… Fisher III, W. W. (1999). ‘Property and Contract on the Internet’, Chicago-Kent Law Review, 73. more… Frank, B. (1996). ‘On an art without copyright’, Kyklos, 49(1), 3-15. Gaines, J. M. (2006). ‘Early cinema’s heyday of copying – The too many copies of L’Arroseur arrose (The Waterer Watered)’, Cultural Studies, 20(2-3), 227-244. more… Galbi, D. (2003). Copyright and Creativity: Authors and Photographers: SSRN. Stable URL more… Gallini, N., & Scotchmer, S. (2003). Intellectual Property: When is it the Best Incentive System? : UCLA Department of Economics. Stable URL more… Gayer, A., & Shy, O. (2003). ‘Internet and peer-to-peer distributions in markets for digital products’, Economics Letters, 81(2), 197-203. Gayer, A., & Shy, O. (2006). ‘Publishers, artists, and copyright enforcement’, Information Economics and Policy, 18(4), 374-384. more… Geist, M. A. (2005). In the public interest : the future of Canadian copyright law. Toronto: Irwin Law. Stable URL more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more…, more… Gelder, K., & Thornton, S. (1997). The subcultures reader. London ; New York: Routledge. Stable URL Geller, P. E. Copyright History and the Future: What’s Culture Got to Do With It?: SSRN. Stable URL more… Gensollen, M. (2007). ‘Information Goods and Online Communities’ in E. Brousseau & N. Curien (eds), Internet and Digital Economics: Cambridge University Press. more… Ghosh, R. A. (2005). CODE : collaborative ownership and the digital economy. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. Givon, M., Mahajan, V., & Muller, E. (1995). ‘Software Piracy – Estimation of Lost Sales and the Impact on Software Diffusion’, Journal of Marketing, 59(1), 29-37. more… Goldhammer, A. (2002). ‘On Diderot & Condorcet.(Denis Diderot, Marie Jean Antoine Nicolas de Caritat)(Brief Article)’, Daedalus, 131(2), 46(42). more… Goldstein, P. (2000). ‘Comment on “lessons from studying the international economics of intellectual property rights”‘, Vanderbilt Law Review, 53(6), 2241-2244. more… Goldstein, P. (2003). Copyright’s highway : from Gutenberg to the celestial jukebox. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford Law and Politics. Stable URL more… Goldstein, P. (2005). ‘Copyright’s Commons’, Columbia Journal of Law & The Arts, 29(1). more… Gopal, R. D., Bhattacharjee, S., & Sanders, G. L. (2006). ‘Do artists benefit from online music sharing?’ Journal of Business, 79(3), 1503-1533. more… Gopal, R. D., & Sanders, G. L. (1998). ‘International software piracy: Analysis of key issues and impacts’, Information Systems Research, 9(4), 380-397. Gopal, R. D., Sanders, G. L., Bhattacharjee, S., Agrawal, M., & Wagner, S. C. (2004). ‘A behavioral model of digital music piracy’, Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 14(2), 89-105. Gordon, M. (1997). ‘The Concept of Sub-Culture and Its Application’, pp. xvi, 599 p. in K. Gelder & S. Thornton (eds), The subcultures reader. London ; New York: Routledge. Stable URL more… Gordon, W. J. (1982). ‘Fair Use as Market Failure: A Structural and Economic Analysis of the “Betamax” Case and Its Predecessors’, Columbia Law Review, 82(8), 1600-1657. Stable URL more… Gurnsey, J. (1995). Copyright theft. Aldershot, Hampshire, England Brookfield, VT: Aslib Gower ; Gower. Hamermesh, D. S., Johnson, G. E., & Weisbrod, B. A. (1982). ‘Scholarship, Citations and Salaries – Economic Rewards in Economics’, Southern Economic Journal, 49(2), 472-481. more… Harrison, F. M. (1934). ‘NATHANIEL PONDER: THE PUBLISHER OF THE PILGRIM’S PROGRESS’, Library, s4-XV(3), 257-294. Stable URL more… Hars, A., & Ou, S. S. (2002). ‘Working for free? Motivations for participating in open-source projects’, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 6(3), 25-39. Heald, P. J. (2007). Property Rights and the Efficient Exploitation of Copyrighted Works: An Empirical Analysis of Public Domain and Copyrighted Fiction Best Sellers: SSRN. Stable URL more… Hebdige, D. (1997). ‘Subculture: The Meaning of Style’, pp. xvi, 599 p. in K. Gelder & S. Thornton (eds), The subcultures reader. London ; New York: Routledge. Stable URL more… Hemmungs Wirtâen, E. (2004). No trespassing : authorship, intellectual property rights, and the boundaries of globalization. Toronto ;: University of Toronto Press. Hemmungs Wirtén, E. (2004). No trespassing : authorship, intellectual property rights, and the boundaries of globalization. Toronto ; Buffalo: University of Toronto Press. more… Herman, A., Coombe, R. J., & Kaye, L. (2006). ‘Your second life? Goodwill and the performativity of intellectual property in online digital gaming’, Cultural Studies, 20(2-3), 184-210. more… Hesmondhalgh, D. (2007). The cultural industries. London, UK ; Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Hess, C., & Ostrom, E. (2003). ‘Ideas, artifacts, and facilities: information as a common-pool resource.(Conference on the Public Domain)’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 111(135). more… Hesse, C. (1990). ‘Enlightenment Epistemology and the Laws of Authorship in Revolutionary France, 1777-1793’, Representations(30), 109-137. Stable URL more… Hesse, C. (2002). ‘The rise of intellectual property, 700 B.C.–A.D. 2000: an idea in the balance’, Daedalus, 131(2), 26(20). more… Hesse, C. A. (1991). Publishing and cultural politics in revolutionary Paris, 1789-1810. Berkeley: University of California Press. Hietanen, H., Oksanen, V., & Välimäki, M. (2007). Community Created Content – Law, Business, Policy: Turre Publishing. more… Holdsworth, W. S. (1920). ‘Press Control and Copyright in the 16th and 17th Centuries’, The Yale Law Journal, 29(8), 841-858. Stable URL more… Huang, C. Y. (2005). ‘File sharing as a form of music consumption’, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 9(4), 37-55. Huang, T. W. S. (1971). ‘Protection of American Copyrights under Nationalist Chinese Law’, Harvard International Law Journal, 12. more… Hughes, J. Copyright and Incomplete Historiographies: Of Piracy, Propertization, and Thomas Jefferson: SSRN. Stable URL more… Hughes, J. (2006). Locke’s 1694 Memorandum (and More Incomplete Copyright Historiographies): SSRN. Stable URL more… Hui, K. L., & Png, I. P. L. (2002). ‘On the supply of creative work: Evidence from the movies’, American Economic Review, 92(2), 217-220. more… Hunter, D., & Lastowka, G. Amateur-to-Amateur: SSRN. Stable URL more… Hunyadi, Z. (2004. november). A budapestiek kulturálódási szokásai. Budapest: Magyar Művelődési Intézet; MTA Szociológiai Kutatóintézet. Stable URL more… Hunyadi, Z. (2005. szeptember). Kulturálódási és szabadidő eltöltési szokások, életmód csoportok. Budapest: Magyar Művelődési Intézet. Stable URL more… Hunyadi, Z., & Dudás, K. (2005. június). A hagyományos (színház, hangverseny, kiállítás) és a modern tömegkultúra (mozi, könnyűzenei koncert) helye és szerepe a kulturális fogyasztásban. Budapest: Magyar Művelődési Intézet. Stable URL more… IFPI. (2001). IFPI Music Piracy Report. more… IFPI. (2006). The Recording Industry 2006 Piracy Report: IFPI. more… Irwin, J. (1997). ‘Notes on the Status of the Concept Subculture’, pp. xvi, 599 p. in K. Gelder & S. Thornton (eds), The subcultures reader. London ; New York: Routledge. Stable URL more… Jaccard, M. A. (1997). ‘Securing copyright in transnational cyberspace: The case for contracting with potential infringers’, Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 35(3), 619-662. Jaszi, P. (1991). ‘Toward a Theory of Copyright – the Metamorphoses of Authorship’, Duke Law Journal(2), 455-502. more… Jaszi, P. (1994). ‘On the Author Effect: Recovering Collectivity’ in M. Woodmansee & P. Jaszi (eds), The Construction of Authorship: Textual Appropriation in Law and Literature: Duke University Press. more… Javorcik, B. S. (2004). ‘The composition of foreign direct investment and protection of intellectual property rights: Evidence from transition economies’, European Economic Review, 48(1), 39-62. Johns, A. (2006). ‘Intellectual property and the nature of science’, Cultural Studies, 20(2-3), 145-164. more… Johns, A. (December 2004). Irish piracy and the English Market, The History of Books and Intellectual History. Princeton University. more… Johns, A. (2002). ‘Pop music pirate hunters’, Daedalus, 131(2), 67(11). more… Johnson, W. R. (1985). ‘The Economics of Copying’, Journal of Political Economy, 93(1), 158-174. Stable URL more… Jones, S. (2006). ‘Reality (c) and virtual reality (c) – When virtual and real worlds collide’, Cultural Studies, 20(2-3), 211-226. more… Judge, C. B. (1934). Elizabethan book-pirates. Cambridge,: Harvard university press. more… Kalaycioglu, S., & Rittersberger-Tilic, H. (2000). ‘Intergenerational solidarity networks of instrumental and cultural transfers within migrant families in Turkey’, Ageing and Society, 20, 523-542. Kant, I. (1785). ‘Of the Injustice of Counterfeiting Books’ in Essays and Treatises on Moral, Political, and Various Philosophical Subjects. London. more… Khan, B. Z. (January 2004). DOES COPYRIGHT PIRACY PAY? THE EFFECTS OF U.S. INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT LAWS ON THE MARKET FOR BOOKS, 1790- 920, NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES. Cambridge, MA: NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH. more… Khan, B. Z. (February 19, 2006. ). ‘An Economic History of Copyright in Europe and the United States’ in R. Whaples (ed), EH.Net Encyclopedia. more… King, S. P., & Lampe, R. (2003). ‘Network externalities, price discrimination and profitable piracy’, Information Economics and Policy, 15(3), 271-290. more… Kitch, E. W. (2000). ‘Elementary and persistent errors in the economic analysis of intellectual property’, Vanderbilt Law Review, 53(6), 1727-1741. more… Klamer, A. (1996). The value of culture : on the relationship between economics and arts. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. Stable URL Klein, B., Lerner, A. V., & Murphy, K. M. (2002). ‘The economics of copyright “fair use” in a networked world’, American Economic Review, 92(2), 205-208. more… Koelman, K. J. Copyright Law & Economics in the Copyright Directive: Is the Droit d’Auteur Passe?: SSRN. Stable URL more… Kritikos, A., & Bolle, F. (2004). ‘Punishment as a public good. When should monopolists care about a consumer boycott?’ Journal of Economic Psychology, 25(3), 355-372. Landes, W. M., & Posner, R. A. (1989). ‘An Economic Analysis of Copyright Law’, The Journal of Legal Studies, 18(2), 325-363. Stable URL more… Landes, W. M., & Posner, R. A. (1989). ‘An Economic-Analysis of Copyright Law’, Journal of Legal Studies, 18(2), 325-363. Landes, W. M., & Posner, R. A. (2003). The economic structure of intellectual property law. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. more… Lange, D. M. (2003). ‘Reimagining the public domain. (Conference on the Public Domain)’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 463(421). more… Leach, J. (2005). ‘Modes of creativity and the register of ownership’, pp. x, 345 p in R. A. Ghosh (ed), CODE : collaborative ownership and the digital economy. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. more… Lee, T. B. (March 21, 2006). Circumventing Competition: The Perverse Consequences of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Policy Analysis (Vol. 564). Stable URL more… Lemley, M. A. (1997). ‘The economics of improvement in intellectual property law’, Texas Law Review, 75(5), 989-1084. Lemley, M. A., & McGowan, D. (1998). ‘Legal implications of network economic effects’, California Law Review, 86(3), 479-611. Lessig, L. (1999). Code and other laws of cyberspace. New York: Basic Books. Lessig, L. (2001). The Future of ideas : the fate of the commons in a connected world. New York: Random House. Lessig, L. (2004). Free culture : how big media uses technology and the law to lock down culture and control creativity. New York: Penguin Press. Leyshon, A. (2003). ‘Scary monsters? Software formats, peer-to-peer networks, and the spectre of the gift’, Environment and Planning D-Society & Space, 21(5), 533-558. Liebowitz, S. J. (1985). ‘Copying and Indirect Appropriability: Photocopying of Journals’, Journal of Political Economy, 93(5), 945-957. Stable URL more… Liebowitz, S. J. (2006). ‘File Sharing: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?’ Journal of Law & Economics, 49(1), 1-28. Stable URL more… Liebowitz, S. J., & Watt, R. (2006). ‘How to best ensure remuneration for creators in the market for music? Copyright and its alternatives’, Journal of Economic Surveys, 20(4), 513-545. more… Locke, J. Second Treatise of Government. more… MacDonald, G. M. (1988). ‘The economics of rising stars’, American Economic Review, v78(n1), p155(112). more… Madow, M. (1993). ‘Private ownership of public image: popular culture and publicity rights’, California Law Review, 81(n1), 125-240. more… Malm, K., & Wallis, R. (1992). Media policy and music activity. London ; New York: Routledge. Stable URL more… Marinova, D., & Raven, M. (2006). ‘Indigenous knowledge and intellectual property: A sustainability agenda’, Journal of Economic Surveys, 20(4), 587-605. more… Marshall, L. (2004). ‘The effects of piracy upon the music industry: a case study of bootlegging’, Media Culture & Society, 26(2), 163-+. Martin, P., & Patrick, W. (2004). An Economist’s Guide to Digital Music, CESifo Working Paper (Vol. 1333): CESifo GmbH. Stable URL more… Maskus, K. E. (2000). ‘Lessons from studying the international economics of intellectual property rights’, Vanderbilt Law Review, 53(6), 2219-2239. more… Maxwell, T. A. (August 2004). ‘Is copyright necessary?’ First Monday, 9(9), URL (consulted Retrieved Date) Stable URL more… McCracken, M. L. (1943). Henry Hills, Pirate Publisher: the Significance of His Pamphlets, with a Bibliography (Vol. doctoral dissertation): University of Texas. Stable URL more… Merryman, J. H. (1989). ‘The Public-Interest in Cultural Property’, California Law Review, 77(2), 339-364. more… Miceli, T. J., & Adelstein, R. P. (2006). ‘An economic model of fair use’, Information Economics and Policy, 18(4), 359-373. Michael, P. (2003). ‘The Weakness in Strong Intellectual Property Rights’, Challenge, 46(6), 32-61. Stable URL more… Michele, B., & David, K. L. (2004). IER Lawrence Klein Lecture: the case against intellectual monopoly: Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. Stable URL more… Miege, B. (1987). ‘The logics at work in the new cultural industries’, Media Culture Society, 9(3), 273-289. Stable URL more… Mikszáth, K. (1874). Az írói tulajdonról, Nógrádi Lapok (Vol. 44-52). more… Miyagawa, E. (2001). ‘Locating libraries on a street’, Social Choice and Welfare, 18(3), 527-541. Myers, F. (2005). ‘Some properties of culture and persons’, pp. x, 345 p in R. A. Ghosh (ed), CODE : collaborative ownership and the digital economy. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. more… Nadel, M. S. How Current Copyright Law Discourages Creative Output: The Overlooked Impact of Marketing: SSRN. Stable URL more… Nadel, M. S. (2003). Questioning The Economic Justification For Copyright, SERCI Working Papers: Society for Economic Research on Copyright Issues. more… Nash, N. F. (1982). ‘English Licenses to Print and Grants of Copyright in the 1640s’, Library, s6-IV(2), 174-184. Stable URL more… National Research Council (U.S.). NII 2000 Steering Committee. (1997). The unpredictable certainty : information infrastructure through 2000 : white papers. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press. Stable URL Netanel, N. W. Impose a Noncommercial Use Levy to Allow Free Peer-to-Peer File Sharing: SSRN. Stable URL more… Newman, J. O. (1985). ‘The Word Made Print: Luther’s 1522 New Testament in an Age of Mechanical Reproduction’, Representations(11), 95-133. Stable URL more… Nguyen, X. T. N., & Maine, J. A. (2004). ‘Taxing the new intellectual property right’, Hastings Law Journal, 56(1), 1-+. Nichols, B. (October 2004). Artist Employment In 2003. In M. Bauerlein (Ed.). Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Arts. more… Niedermüller, P. (2001). ‘A kultúraközi kommunikációról ‘ in I. Béres & Ö. Horányi (eds), Társadalmi kommunikáció. Budapest: Osiris. Stable URL Nimmer, D. (2003). ‘”Fairest of them all” and other fairy tales of fair use. (copyright law) (Conference on the Public Domain)’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 263(225). more… Novos, I. E., & Waldman, M. (1984). ‘The Effects of Increased Copyright Protection: An Analytic Approach’, The Journal of Political Economy, 92(2), 236-246. Stable URL more… Novos, I. E., & Waldman, M. (1987). ‘The Emergence of Copying Technologies – What Have We Learned’, Contemporary Policy Issues, 5(3), 34-45. more… Oberholzer-Gee, F., & Strumpf, K. (2007). ‘The effect of file sharing on record sales: An empirical analysis’, Journal of Political Economy, 115(1), 1-42. more… Oksanen, V., & Välimäki, M. (2/2005). ‘Copyright Levies as an Alternative Compensation Method for Recording Artists and Technological Development’, Review of Economic Research on Copyright Issues, 2(2), 25-39. more… O’Reilly, T. (April 11, 2005). ‘Oops – Only 4% of Titles Are Being Commercially Exploited’, O’Reilly Radar, URL (consulted Retrieved Date) Stable URL more… p2pnet.net. (2006). Average Simultaneous Global P2P Users 2003-2006. more… Peitz, M., & Waelbroeck, P. (2006). ‘Piracy of digital products: A critical review of the theoretical literature’, Information Economics and Policy, 18(4), 449-476. more… Peitz, M., & Waelbroeck, P. (2006). ‘Why the music industry may gain from free downloading – The role of sampling’, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 24(5), 907-913. more… Pessach, G. (2003). ‘Copyright law as a silencing restriction on noninfringing materials: Unveiling the scope of copyright’s diversity externalities’, Southern California Law Review, 76(5), 1067-1104. Peterson, R. A., & Berger, D. G. (1975). ‘Cycles in Symbol Production – Case of Popular Music’, American Sociological Review, 40(2), 158-173. more… Picard, R. G. (2004). ‘A note on economic losses due to theft, infringement, and piracy of protected works’, Journal of Media Economics, 17(3), 207-217. more… Picker, R. C. (2002). Copyright as Entry Policy: The Case of Digital Distribution: SSRN. Stable URL more… Plant, M. (1939). The English book trade; an economic history of the making and sale of books. London,: G. Allen & Unwin ltd. more… Plant, M. (1974). The English book trade : an economic history of the making and sale of books. London: Allen & Unwin. Pollard, A. W. (1916). ‘THE REGULATION OF THE BOOK TRADE IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY’, Library, s3-VII(25), 18-43. Stable URL more… Pollard, A. W. (1917). Shakespeare’s fight with the pirates and the problems of the transmission of his text. London: A Moring. Pollard, A. W. (1920). Shakespeare’s fight with the pirates and the problems of the transmission of his text. Cambridge [Eng.]: The University Press. more… Pollard, A. W. (1922). ‘SOME NOTES ON THE HISTORY OF COPYRIGHT IN ENGLAND, 1662-1774’, Library, s4-III(2), 97-114. Stable URL more… Posner, R. A. (2002). ‘The law & economics of intellectual property’, Daedalus, 131(2), 5(8). Pouwelse, J. A., Garbacki, P., Epema, D. H. J., & Sips, H. J. (2005). The Bittorrent P2P File-sharing System: Measurements and Analysis, 4th Int’l Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems (IPTPS) (Vol. 3640): LNCS. more… Rai, A. K., & Eisenberg, R. S. (2003). ‘Bayh-Dole reform and the progress of biomedicine. (Conference on the Public Domain)’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 289(226). more… Redmond, D. A. (1990). Sherlock Holmes among the pirates : copyright and Conan Doyle in America 1890-1930. New York: Greenwood Press. more… Rees, E., & Morgan, G. (1979). ‘Welsh Almanacks, 1680-1835: Problems of Piracy’, Library, s6-I(2), 144-163. Stable URL Reese, R. A. The First Sale Doctrine in the Era of Digital Networks: SSRN. Stable URL more… Reichman, J. H., & Uhlir, P. F. (2003). ‘A contractually reconstructed research commons for scientific data in a highly protectionist intellectual property environment.(Conference on the Public Domain)’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 315(148). more… Richardson, R. S., & Gaisford, J. D. (1996). ‘North-South disputes over the protection of intellectual property. (developed and developing countries)’, Canadian Journal of Economics, v29(nSPEISS), pS376(376). more… Rob, R., & Waldfogel, J. (2006). ‘Piracy on the high C’s: Music downloading, sales displacement, and social welfare in a sample of college students’, Journal of Law & Economics, 49(1), 29-62. more… Rochelandet, F. (2005). ‘Unauthorised sharing through P2P networks: A digital pollution?’ Journal of Network Industries, 5(1), 25-45. more… Rochelandet, F., Le Guel, F., Bazot, A., & Dourgnon, J. The Copying Practices Of French Internet Users: An Economic Analysis (pp. 37). Paris: ADIS-Robinson; UFC Que Choisir. more… Rodman, G. B., & Vanderdonckt, C. (2006). ‘Music for nothing or, I want my mp3 – The regulation and recirculation of affect’, Cultural Studies, 20(2-3), 245-261. more… Rose, C. M. (2003). ‘Romans, roads, and romantic creators: traditions of public property in the information age. (Conference on the Public Domain)’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 89(22). more… Rose, M. (1988). ‘The Author as Proprietor, Donaldson-V-Becket and the Genealogy of Modern Authorship’, Representations(23), 51-85. more… Rose, M. (1993). Authors and owners : the invention of copyright. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. more… Rose, M. (2003). ‘Nine-tenths of the law: the English copyright debates and the rhetoric of the public domain. (Conference on the Public Domain)’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 75(13). more… Rosen, S. (1981). ‘The Economics of Superstars’, American Economic Review, 71(5), 845-858. more… Ruccio, D., Graham, J., & Amariglio, J. (1996). ‘”The Good, the Bad and the Different”: Reflections on Economic and Aesthetic Value’, pp. 56-77 in A. Klamer (ed), The value of culture : on the relationship between economics and arts. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. Stable URL more… Samuelson, P. (2003). ‘Mapping the digital public domain: threats and opportunities. (Conference on the Public Domain)’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 147(125). more… Sanjek, D. (2006). ‘Ridiculing the ‘White Bread Ooriginal’ – The politics of parody and preservation of greatness in Luther Campbell a.k.a. Luke Skyywalker et al. v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.’ Cultural Studies, 20(2-3), 262-281. more… Saunders, D. (1992). Authorship and copyright. London ;: Routledge. more… Schultz, J. (2002). The Myth of the 1976 Copyright “Chaos” Theory. more… Schultz, M. F. ‘Fear and Norms and Rock & Roll: What Jambands Can Teach Us about Persuading People to Obey Copyright Law’. Stable URL more… Schultz, M. F. (2006). ‘Copynorms: Copyright and Social Norms’. Stable URL more… Scotchmer, S. (2004). ‘The political economy of intellectual property treaties’, Journal of Law Economics & Organization, 20(2), 415-437. more… Scott, K. (1998). ‘Authorship, the Academie, and the Market in Early Modern France’, Oxford Art Journal, 21(1), 29-41. Stable URL more… Shapiro, C., & Varian, H. R. (1998). ‘Versioning: The smart way to sell information’, Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 106-+. Slive, J., & Bernhardt, D. (1998). ‘Pirated for Profit’, The Canadian Journal of Economics / Revue canadienne d’Economique, 31(4), 886-899. Stable URL more… Smiers, J. (2000). ‘The Abolition of Copyright: Better for Artists, Third World Countries and the Public Domain’, International Communication Gazette, 62(5), 379-406. Stable URL more… Sobek, O. (1992). ‘Alternative Ways in Financing Public-Goods and Services’, Ekonomicky Casopis, 40(1), 24-39. Solly, E. (1885). ‘Henry Hills, the Pirate Printer’, Antiquary, xi, 151-154. more… SPEDIDAM. (Mars 2006). La licence globale optionnelle: SPEDIDAM. more… Standage, T. (1998). The Victorian Internet : the remarkable story of the telegraph and the nineteenth century*s on-line pioneers. New York: Walker and Co. more… Standage, T. (1998). The Victorian Internet : the remarkable story of the telegraph and the nineteenth centuryŽs on-line pioneers. New York: Walker and Co. Strahilevitz, L. J. (2003). ‘Charismatic code, social norms, and the emergence of cooperation on the fileswapping networks’, Virginia Law Review, 89(3), 505-595. more… Streeter, T. (1994). ‘Broadcast Copyright and the Bureaucratization of Property’ in M. Woodmansee & P. Jaszi (eds), The Construction of Authorship: Textual Appropriation in Law and Literature: Duke University Press. more… Striphas, T., & McLeod, K. (2006). ‘Strategic improprieties: Cultural studies, the everyday, and the politics of intellectual properties’, Cultural Studies, 20(2-3), 119-144. more… Sunstein, C. R., & Ullmann-Margalit, E. (2001). ‘Solidarity goods’, Journal of Political Philosophy, 9(2), 129-149. more… Takeyama, L., Gordon, W. J., & Towse, R. (2005). Developments in the economics of copyright : research and analysis. Cheltenham, UK ; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Takeyama, L. N. (1994). ‘The Welfare Implications of Unauthorized Reproduction of Intellectual Property in the Presence of Demand Network Externalities’, Journal of Industrial Economics, 42(2), 155-166. more… Thomas, M. (1994). ‘Reading and Writing the Renaissance Commonplace Book: A Question of Authorship?’ in M. Woodmansee & P. Jaszi (eds), The Construction of Authorship: Textual Appropriation in Law and Literature: Duke University Press. more… Throsby, D. (2003). ‘Determining the Value of Cultural Goods: How Much (or How Little) Does Contingent Valuation Tell Us?(Author abstract)’, Journal of Cultural Economics, 27(3-4), 275(211). more… Toldy (Schedel), F. (1838). ‘Néhány szó az írói tulajdonról’, Athenaeum, 705-717. more… Torrubia, A., Mora, F. J., & Marti, L. (2001). ‘Cryptography regulations for e-commerce and digital rights management.’ Computers & Security, 20(8), 724-738. Torsson, P., & Fleischer, R. (2005). The Grey Commons, 22C3. Berlin. Tuckman, H. P., & Leahey, J. (1975). ‘What Is an Article Worth?’ The Journal of Political Economy, 83(5), 951-968. Stable URL more… Turner, F. (2006). From counterculture to cyberculture : Stewart Brand, the Whole Earth Network, and the rise of digital utopianism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Stable URL Tushnet, R. (2006). ‘My library: Copyright and the role of institutions in a peer-to-peer world’, Ucla Law Review, 54(4), 977-1029. more… Van Alstyne, W. W. (2003). ‘Reconciling what the First Amendment forbids with what the Copyright Clause permits: a summary explanation and review. (Conference on the Public Domain)’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 225(213). more… Varian, H. ‘Pricing information goods’, H. R. Varian, Pricing information goods, available at hhttp://www.sims.berkeley.edu/¸hal/people/hal/papers.html citeseer.ist.psu.edu/varian95pricing.html more… Wallis, R., & Malm, K. (1984). Big sounds from small peoples : the music industry in small countries. N[ew] Y[ork], NY: Pendragon Press. more… Wark, M. (2006). ‘Information wants to be free (but is everywhere in chains)’, Cultural Studies, 20(2-3), 165-183. more… Watt, R. (2000). Copyright and economic theory : friends or foes? Cheltenham, UK ; Northampton, MA, USA: E Elgar. Weinreb, L. L. (1997-1998). ‘Copyright for Functional Expression’, Harvard Law Review, 111. more… Wirten, E. H. (2006). ‘Out of sight and out of mind – On the cultural hegemony of intellectual property (critique)’, Cultural Studies, 20(2-3), 282-291. more… Withers, K. (February 2006). Intellectual Property and the Knowledge Economy, Intellectual Property and the Public Sphere: Balancing Competing Priorities. London: Institute for Public Policy Research. more… Wittmann, R. (December 2004). Viennese and South German Pirates and the German Market, The History of Books and Intellectual History. Princeton University. more… Woodmansee, M. (1984). ‘The Genius and the Copyright: Economic and Legal Conditions of the Emergence of the ‘Author”, Eighteenth-Century Studies, 17(4), 425-448. Stable URL more… Woodmansee, M. (1994). The author, art, and the market : rereading the history of aesthetics. New York: Columbia University Press. more… Woodmansee, M. (1994). ‘On the ‘Author Effect’: Recovering Collectivity’ in M. Woodmansee & P. Jaszi (eds), The Construction of Authorship: Textual Appropriation in Law and Literature: Duke University Press. more… Woodmansee, M. (2000). ‘The Cultural Work of Copyright: Legislating Authorship in Britain, 1837–1842 ‘ in Law in the domains of culture University of Michigan Press. more… Woodmansee, M., & Jaszi, P. D. B. (1994). The Construction of authorship : textual appropriation in law and literature. Durham: Duke University Press. Zentner, A. (2006). ‘Measuring the Effect of File Sharing on Music Purchases’, Journal of Law & Economics, 49(1), 63-90. Stable URL more… Zimmermann, P. R. (2006). ‘Just Say No – Negativland’s No Business’, Cultural Studies, 20(2-3), 316-322. more…
Market capitalization Cisco addresses legit P2P in Supervisor enhancement – CBRonline.com
Michael Geist – The Unintended Consequences of Rogers’ Packet Shaping
VPN networks, any SSL encoded traffic (including your mail service), and privacy are the victims. See the next post to put this news into context. Kevin J. Delaney. Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Apr 17, 2007. pg. A.1
Last year Mr. Martinez’s childhood friend, Mr. [Billy Duran], built on the idea and created a site called “VTele” as an assignment for a computer-science class at Central New Mexico Community College. Through it, users could view TV shows and movies that he and Mr. Martinez copied from DVDs and uploaded to the school’s computer servers. The 23-year-old Mr. Duran says he got an “A” on the project. But within a month, the site attracted so many users that some of the school’s computer servers crashed. Administrators threatened Mr. Duran with expulsion. Mr. Duran dropped out of Central New Mexico, and the two friends relaunched the site in September. At first it relied on volunteers to store video files on their own servers, until a user pointed Mr. Martinez to Dailymotion. “I was like, ‘Oh my gosh — gold mine!'” recalls Mr. Martinez. “We had all 18 seasons of ‘The Simpsons’ in two hours.” ShareMonkey :: Find the file origin of p2p movies, mp3s, software and other fileshare downloads
p2pnet.net – the original daily p2p and digital media news site
At least this is what proprietary software people prefer… Microsoft executive: Pirating software? Choose Microsoft!
Copyright vow going down the YouTube | FT business | The Australian
p2pnet.net – the original daily p2p and digital media news site:
TVU networks corporation | About:
Slyck News – Snakes on a Torrent:
Here I collect the texts I have written as part of the research: The Club model of cultural consumption and distribution When it comes to the market of digital goods, clubs –buyers teaming up to buy a single item and share it among themselves– seem to have little or no economic significance. Digital files are either perfectly controlled, thus the producer can appropriate all of the consumer surplus that could have arose by forming a club, or there is no way to control unauthorized copying thus there is no price at which it would be reasonable to sell a good on the market. Is there a way to propagate the emergence of such communities through adequate A nyilvános könyvtári kölcsönzések után a jogosultaknak fizetendő jogdíj (Public Lending Ha a PLR nemzeti kultúrpolitikai eszköz, akkor viszont azt a megállapítást tehetjük, hogy a PLR a meglévő kultúratámogatási rendszerek mellett való üzemeltetése indokolatlanul Végül pedig a jogosultak, szerzők szemszögéből megvizsgálva a kérdést: nincs olyan szerző a földön, aki visszavonná egy megjelent művét a könyvtárakból csak azért mert azt vélelmezi, hogy a kölcsönzések miatt eladásoktól esik el. Ennek az egyetlen oka az, hogy a szerzők számára a könyvtárban való jelenlét haszna nagyobb, mint a könyvtári olvasók által okozott kiesett kereslet. Már csak emiatt sem érdemes a PLR bevezetése. The Pirates of The Pirates of the Caribbean This is the PowerPoint presentation of the talk I gave on the Chicago Kent Law School this March. “File-sharing communities are also remembering communities. They direct attention and thus demand, they discuss and thus keep alive cultural goods. When something is posted as available for download, not only those fetch it have requested a particular item, but also those who were standing nearby. These individuals are reciting work long forgotten like those who in Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 memorize books to be able to share them with others.” Sobri Joska Digital – in hungarian Megjelent a Café Babel 2006 decemberi, Hiány c. számában. “A Csendes Könyvtár és az összes többi hasonló szolgáltatás az úgynevezett közjavakra épülő internetes kooperációs hálózatokra (commons based peer production networks) példa. A piac által (kényszerűségből) szabadon hagyott résekben, marginális igények, érdekek körül a semmiből jönnek létre olyan közösségek, melyek a hálózat tagjai között elosztott különböző képességeket, erőforrásokat (időt, szkennert, karakterfelismerő programot, korrektúrázó képességet) képesek hatékonyan összehangolni egy olyan feladat érdekében, melynek gyümölcseit aztán mindenki szabadon és ingyenesen élvezheti.”
A szerzői jog gazdaságtana az online világban Frissen elkészült könyvfejezet. “A szerzői jog közgazdasági elemzése során a szerzőknek biztosított monopoljog különös figyelmet vívott ki magának. Ennek az az oka, hogy a monopol helyzetben levő termelők maguk határozzák meg a piaci árat, és ez az ár jellemzően nagyobb, mint amennyi versenyhelyzetben lenne. Tökéletes verseny esetén a piaci ár megegyezik a termék határköltségével, azaz azzal az összeggel, amennyibe a legutolsó példány elkészítése kerül. A monopóliumok határköltségnél magasabb ára azzal jár, hogy a piaci kereslet egy
A szőnyeg alá söpört archívum “Ma Magyarországon az a kérdés, hogy a piacra várnunk-e, hogy ezeket az archívumokat kiépítsék, a nehézkesen működő és alulfinanszírozott közintézményekre lőcsöljük-e ezt a feladatot, vagy megteremtjük annak lehetőségét, hogy a magyar kulturális közösség fenntartsa önmagát. A Neumann-ház megrendelésére elkészített Nemzeti Digitális Adattár 2.0 vitaanyag a közösségi archiválás lehetőségének kiterjesztését tartalmazza, az első lépés tehát ezügyben megtörtént. Még egy lépés azonban hátra van. Dekriminalizálni kellene kirillt, scan_dalt, helpert és társaik. Hogy ne fordulhasson elő az, hogy ennek az örökségnek piaci, személyes érdekeket sértő részei esetleg nem maradnak fenn. Hogy ne legyen bűnöző az a soktízezres közösség, amelyik a magyar audiovizuális örökség archiválásán dolgozik – társadalmi munkában.” Megjelent az Élet és Irodalom 2007. január 5-i számában. “A közpénzből finanszírozott, közszolgálati archívum kapuit minél szélesebbre kell tárni. A hat havi elérhetőséget nem szűkíteni kell, hanem az archívum digitalizálásával bővíteni. Az archívumi anyagok lementését, felhasználását, adott esetben átalakítását nem megakadályozni kell hanem a megfelelő jogi konstrukció kidolgozásával megengedni , támogatni, bátorítani. Ezt követeli a finanszírozás módja. Ezt követeli a közszolgálatiság jelentése. Ezt követeli a piaci értékesítés igénye. Ezt követeli a józan ész.” A short description of my research. Régebbi cikkek/ older writings A „mély link” Megjelent a Beszélő 2003 szeptemberi számában. “Mély link valójában nincs. Link van, mely mutathat bárhová: egy portál címoldalára, a legutolsó, senki által nem olvasott cikkére, képre, linkgyűjteményre, bárhova. A mély linkelést nem lehet megtiltani, csupán azt lehet technológiai eszközökkel elérni, hogy egy adott gyűjteménybe csak egy, a hivatalos kapun keresztül lehessen bejutni. Ott pedig, ahol korábban szabad volt az átjárás, jogi vagy technológiai falak kezdenek épülni, melyek az internet mindent mindennel összekötő hipertextuális szövetéből kiragadnak, elérhetetlenné tesznek tartalmakat. Az intertextualitásból kiemelt, a többi szöveggel való kapcsolatától megfosztott valami pedig megszűnik szövegnek lenni.” Bolyongás egy áldás nélküli térben Megjelent a Café Babelben 2004-ben. “Az egyre lezáródó fizikai, média- és kulturális terekben az autonómia megteremtése egyre költségesebb: magas a lebukás veszélye és nagy a várható büntetés, megfizethetetlenek a kártérítési és nem utolsó sorban jogi költségek. Nehéz felbecsülni, hogy az egyre szigorodó ellenőrzési technikák milyen mértékben gátolják üzenetek megjelenését, hiszen a leginkább kockázatvállalókat kivéve az alkotóknak nem áll érdekükben láthatóvá válni, nem szeretnék magukra felhívni a figyelmet. Ha mégis, akkor a szólás szabadságát keresők szükségszerűen mozognak a gyengébb ellenállás, tehát olyan médiumok felé, melyek könnyebben támadhatók, azaz ellenőrzésük architekturális okokból nehezebben megoldható”
Wrong. It is Nokia.
The ASUS WL-700gE Wi-Fi Router:
via p2pnet.net CARFAC – the coalition of canadian artists with the question “if artists are not paid for what they create, why would anyone make art?” on their banner and Appropriation Art- a coalition of appropriation artists seem to have some issues among each other. From the letter of the latter in reply to the former:
What is on stake? Moral rights in the new canadian copyright law. … high tech proprietary networks rise. Slyck News reports on the All-New Warez P2P – Version 3.0:
If the promise of networks being able to grant speed, variety and anonimity as protection for the everyday user whom will RIAA sue? All those poor souls who are not smart enough to choose a software offering the protection? Not the most “dangerous” but the lamest? We’ll see. IPcentral drew my attention to Chris Castle’ article on net neutrality and copyright in which he argues, no, rants about net neutrality supporters who are defending illegal downloading by opposing people peeping into IP packet contents. As for myself, this is certainly a reason supporting net neutrality. Another one is that I dont want people like Chris policing my communications. GUse this tool to find downloadable mp3s on Google.
SiliconBeat reports:”Skyrider, a Mountain View start-up, is developing technology that will be able to search peer-to-peer traffic, in order to help media and other companies become more profitable. The two-year old company has raised $8 million from Silicon Valley’s top VC firm Sequoia Capital, along with Charles River Ventures. The company’s product will be announced in fall, the company told us last night. (Here is their release.) The company aims to “monetize” popular peer-to-peer networks, which have emerged to help circulate large files such as video. Since that’s where the information is, that’s where to do the best mining. And the company is working on a search platform that spans across P2P platforms.” JavaScriptSearch News reports:”exaroom, inc. unveiled its new product beta for a file-sharing service, www.exaroom.com. The new exaroom service enables members to access files on their own computer and their friends’ shared files from their browser.” |
||
|
|
||
|
|
 |
 |
“It’s out there — you just have to hunt around for it a bit,” says the 28-year-old Mr. [Sam Martinez]. Like many similar sites, YouTVpc relies heavily on video-sharing sites outside the U.S., such as a French outfit called Dailymotion and Ouou.com in China. Mr. Martinez estimates that about 40% of the shows and films on the site — including episodes of “Desperate Housewives” and Fox’s “Prison Break” are provided by Ouou.com.
