Net Neutrality May Affect Costs on Wall Street
“We all know that corporate America is divided over the issue of network neutrality. In one corner are the Broadband Warriors (AT&T, Verizon, etc.), who don’t want any restrictions placed on their ability to ‘innovate.’ In the other corner stand the Titans of Tech (Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, etc.) who don’t want to find themselves paying a whole new set of fees just to ensure the level of service they already receive. But lost in all this talk of two camps is the fact that many non-technology businesses in the US rely on mission-critical network links — and many of these industries have not yet decided where they stand on the issue of ‘Net neutrality.
“One such industry, notable for its size and political clout, is the financial services sector, which last year spent $117 billion on IT. The financial world is increasingly computerized, running everything from consumer-oriented online banking websites to sophisticated ATM networks, and they’ve recently awoken to the fact that network neutrality legislation will have a direct effect on their business.
“Philip Corwin, a DC lawyer, has been circulating a memo on the topic to Wall Street executives over the last few weeks. In it, he calls the industry to action on behalf of network neutrality. ‘If the industry does not engage quickly, it may find that the matter has been decided without its input and that the fallout will affect the industry’s cost structure and customer relations for years to come,’ he wrote.”
Ars Technica. Wall Street Wakes to Net Neutrality; Verizon Tries to Hit ‘Snooze.’ May 9, 2006.
See also:
Anne Broache. Smaller Cable Firms Take Aim at Net Neutrality Fans. News.com. May 8, 2006.
Kristin Roberts. U.S. Finance Sector Puts Web Pricing in Crosshairs. Yahoo! News. May 2, 2006.
CNet Politics Blog. Net Neutrality Proposal Revived in House. May 2, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the law, business, and technology of digital content. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Explaining The Harmonization Trap
If one thing has become clear over the past few years, it’s that the broadcast entertainment industry will try every possible route to get rules put in place that favor them at the expense of consumers. Even when struck down in one area, they’ll try to sneak them in somewhere else.
“A favorite move has been the ‘international treaty.’ It’s pretty sneaky how this works. What happens is they play a geopolitical game of leapfrog. The industry gets its diplomats to claim that a treaty is needed to ‘harmonize’ international laws on things like copyright, because one country has less stringent laws than another. Of course, the treaty always focuses on bringing the less stringent rules up to the level of the nation with the more stringent rules. Then, the industry works on getting local laws made stronger again… and then claims that the international partners all have to boost the levels of protection again to ‘harmonize things.
What happens is you get an escalating system where the laws keep getting more stringent as each side tries to “catch up” with the other, while leapfrogging them each time they do.
TechDirt. Big Content Goes Back To Sneaking Bad Rules In Through Treaties. May 2, 2006.
See also:
K. Matthew Dames. Doublespeak, Pt. 2. CopyCense. Nov. 22, 2005.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the law, business, and technology of digital content. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Apple Wins Trademark Battle Over Beatles
“The music company owned by Apple Corps today lost its legal battle against Apple Computer over the US firm’s use of an apple logo for iTunes.
“The high court in London ruled that Apple Computer — makers of the phenomenally successful iPod music player — had not infringed upon Apple Corp’s trademarks by selling music through its iTunes Music Store.
“Lawyers for Apple Corps — which is owned by Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr and the families of John Lennon and George Harrison — had argued that the iTunes store broke a 1991 deal between the two companies.
Guardian Unlimited. Beatles Label Loses Apple Logo Case to iTunes. May 8, 2006.
See also:
Jefferson Graham. Apple Prevails in Suit By Beatles. USA Today. May 8, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the law, business, and technology of digital content. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Federal Judge Questions CALEA Viability
“A federal appeals court suggested on Friday that government regulations levying extensive Internet wiretapping requirements on universities and libraries may go too far.
“The U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, DC sharply questioned whether the Federal Communications Commission exceeded its legal authority last year when it ordered ‘any type of broadband Internet access service’ and many Net phone services to rewire their networks for police convenience.
“The Bush administration had pressed to extend wiretapping rules to the Internet for years, saying they were necessary to make it easier to catch ‘criminals, terrorists and spies who would otherwise be able to evade detection. But the organizations behind the lawsuit (including the Association of American Universities and the American Library Association) say Congress never intended to force broadband providers — and networks at corporations and universities — to build in central surveillance hubs for the police.”
Declan McCullagh. Appeals Court Takes Dim View of Net-Tapping Rules. News.com. May 5, 2006.
See also:
Ars Technica. The FCC’s Battle With Universities and Libraries Over VoIP and Data Wiretapping Continues. May 5, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the law, business, and technology of digital content. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Patent Office to Brief Public on Peer-Review Initiative
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will hold a briefing on May 12, 2006, from 9:00 a.m. to noon in the agency’s Madison building. The USPTO has created a partnership with academia and the private sector to launch an online, peer review pilot project that seeks to ensure that patent examiners will have improved access to all available prior art during the patent examination process.
As a follow-up to the February 16th meeting, this briefing will focus on further developing previously discussed initiatives as well as answering the question of what constitutes valid prior art and a greater in-depth analysis of the peer review pilot project that is under consideration.
An agenda is available online. Registration is strongly encouraged; register by e-mail at OpenSource2006@uspto.gov.
USPTO to Hold Briefing on Patent Peer Review Pilot Project
Friday, May 12, 2006
9:00 am -12:00 noon
Madison Auditorium, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
USPTO Headquarters
Madison Auditorium, South Side
600 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the law, business, and technology of digital content. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
French Citizens Rail Against Changes to Anti-DRM Bill
“A peaceful crowd of several hundred gathered at the Place de la Bastille in Paris Sunday afternoon to march in support of ‘digital freedom’ — and against digital rights management and a proposed change in copyright law currently on the floor of the French Senate.
“The demonstrators, many of whom identified themselves as open-source software developers, said they were protesting the bill on two fronts: consumers’ right to fair use and software developers’ freedom to innovate.
“The controversial legislation has come under fire from all sides. Often described as the “iPod law,” the bill has triggered anxiety in the business community here and abroad, which fears the mandate for “interoperability” could shut down Apple Computer’s iTunes service based on its proprietary DRM approach.”
Junko Yoshida. Anti-DRM March in Paris Targets Big Tech Firms. EE Times. May 8, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the law, business, and technology of digital content. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
Who’s the Real Trump?
One of the things we pride ourselves on is the reliability and credibility of our sourcing. As a firm rule, CopyCense cites only to online and print sources that meet our standards for accuracy, timeliness, and credibility. Therefore, we tend to cite to established publications that refrain from running gossip or sensationalistic stories.
There are times, though, that the really juicy stuff only is available via tabloids. This is one of those times.
The Smoking Gun, that online rag of guilty informational and literary pleasures, has reported that The Donald is suing ex-wife Ivana Trump to keep her from using her name as a trademark in a new real estate business. Writes TSG: “Donald (who is identified as the “famous real estate developer”) argues that issuance of the trademark sought by his ex would be ‘confusingly similar’ to his own valuable handle. Ivana filed her trademark application in September 2004, but it wasn’t until the mark was ‘published’ in February that USPTO proceedings could be started by anyone seeking to challenge the requested trademark.”
Marty Schwimmer, who writes and edits The Trademark Blog [ link ], notes the really pertinent issue: “You’d have thought the divorce settlement would have envisioned this.”
The Smoking Gun. Donald And Ivana In Trademark Tangle. May 3, 2006.
CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the law, business, and technology of digital content. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.
COPYCENSE 