From: [log in to unmask][mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 11:43 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: The Filter, No. 4.6
No. 4.6 <--The Filter--> 11.26.01
Your regular dose of public-interest Internet news and commentary
from the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at
H a r v a r d L a w S c h o o l
CONTENTS:
[1] In the News
[2] Dispatches
[3] Berkman News
[4] Bookmarks
[5] Quotable
[6] Talk Back
[7] Subscription Info
[8] About us
[9] Not a Copyright
-----------------------------------------
[1] IN THE NEWS
================
* Commons Sense: In the spring of 1998 Berkman Center Faculty
Director Charles Nesson greeted attendees at Harvard's Second
International Conference on Internet & Society with a challenge.
"Is cyberspace to be a global commons or just a mall?" asked
Nesson. He urged attendees to take responsibility for maintaining
a balance between private and public interests on the Internet.
"Now is the time to build global parks in cyberspace--to open,
nurture and maintain vibrant non-commercial spaces where people
can freely create, learn, and play."
At the time few appeared to listen; after all, conventional
wisdom said that there was infinite "space" on the Internet
in which to freely create, and that the private sector would
continue to lead--and further, to nurture--innovation.
Now Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig has published
"The Future of Ideas: The Fate of the Commons in a Connected
World," in which he elaborates upon the notion of a shared
digital commons, painstakingly documenting what has since become
known as the "second enclosure movement." "Under the guise of
protecting private property, a series of new laws and regulations
are dismantling the very architecture that made the Internet
a framework for global innovation," writes Lessig in an article
summarizing key arguments from the book. "[T]he Internet took
off precisely because core resources were not 'divided among
private owners.' Instead, the core resources of the Internet
were left in a 'commons.' It was this commons that engendered
the extraordinary innovation that the Internet has seen. It is
the enclosure of this commons that will bring about the
Internet's demise."
<http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/future/>
<http://www.foreignpolicy.com/issue_novdec_2001/lessig.html>
On November 9-11 Professor James Boyle of Duke convened the
"Conference on the Public Domain," at which participants
discussed the full range of issues surrounding digital property
rights and the public domain. Among the presentations was a
roundtable discussion on "The Creative Commons," a new project
headed by Boyle, Lessig, MIT's Hal Abelson, Villanova Law School's
Michael Carroll, and Berkman Center Executive Director Eric
Saltzman. (See Berkman News for details.) Follow the links
below to access the webcast archive of the conference and
to delve into the treasure trove of conference focus papers.
<http://www.law.duke.edu/pd/>
<http://www.law.duke.edu/pd/papers.html>
What's next? The Berkman Center will shortly present its
Winter 2002 Internet Law Program of Instruction, the residential
segment of which will take place on January 2-4 in Singapore.
Lessig and Nesson are among the outstanding educators assembled
to teach the program. It's not too late to register; visit the
URL below for details.
<http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/ilaw>
* Cipro--a Cure for Patent Madness?: Two weeks after the September
11 terrorist attack, James Love of the Consumer Project on
Technology visited Harvard Law School to participate in a panel
discussion on the impact American trademark and patent law has on
the distribution of essential medicines to HIV/AIDS-ravaged regions
of Africa and South Africa. "We need to examine the cost of
imposing IP protections," Love told Filter reporter Adam White.
"If you are okay with massive loss of life in Africa, then, okay,
we'll keep IP protections where they are. But that question is not
an exaggeration. Currently, four to five million people are
infected with HIV/AIDS [in South Africa]. Their access to these
life-saving medicines are severely limited by American IP
protections, and it is illegal to sell the non-trademarked
equivalent in the South African market."
A month later Love was back in the ring, again publicly advocating
for compulsory licensing of essential medicines--only this time
the medicine in question was the anti-anthrax drug Ciprofloxacin.
(See <http://www.cptech.org/ip/health/cl/cipro/nadethom10182001.html>.)
Now, after tough negotiations among participants at its Fourth
Ministerial Conference in Doha, Qatar, the World Trade
Organization (WTO) has issued a declaration affirming the rights of
developing countries to override patents in the interests of public
health. "We agree that the Trips [trade-related aspects of intellectual
property] agreement does not and should not prevent members from taking
measures to protect public health," the declaration states. (See
<http://lists.essential.org/pipermail/ip-health/2001-November/002405.html>
.)
Despite initial resistance, US trade representatives have endorsed the
declaration. Why the change of heart? Love argues that developing
countries may have gained leverage in the negotiations after US
"hypocrisy" was exposed. "The Cipro thing was timely," Love told the San
Francisco Chronicle. "When the US did not like the price of a medicine, we
were very fast to say we might override patent rights. When Brazil did the
same thing(for AIDS drugs), they were savaged."
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37845-2001Nov15.html>
<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/11
/08/MN181543.DTL>
<http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20011030/hl/brazil_1.html>
* Microsoft Settles--for Market Share: Proving that irony is far
from dead, Microsoft last week unveiled a proposal to settle numerous
private antitrust suits against the company by supplying more than
$1 billion in training, support, hardware and software to the
nation's poorest schools. The package includes generous helpings
of such popular Microsoft products as Windows and Office--and
there's the rub. While Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer was quick
to point out that "the money can be used for non-Microsoft software,"
critics contend that with virtually unlimited supplies of the company's
software at their fingertips, schools would be unlikely to purchase
products by Apple and other software providers. "While we applaud
Microsoft for raising the idea of helping poorer schools as part
of the penalty phase of their conviction for monopolistic practices,
we do not think that the remedy should be a mechanism by which
Microsoft can further extend its monopoly," said Matthew Szulik,
CEO of open-source software provider Red Hat. So what's the
solution? Red Hat has offered to distribute open-source software
to every school district in the US for free, proposing that
Microsoft redirect the money that would have been spent on its
software donation to the purchase of additional hardware.
<http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1006-200-7936780.htm>
<http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB1006285944759274840.htm>
(Registration required.)
<http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/011120/202744_1.html>
<http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/21/technology/21SOFT.html>
(Registration required.)
US District Judge J. Frederick Motz will consider the settlement
proposal in a hearing on Tuesday.
<http://www.siliconvalley.com/docs/news/reuters_wire/1678877l.htm>
Meanwhile, the Justice Department's settlement of the government
case against Microsoft faces a "public interest" hearing. The
Justice Department has filed its Competitive Impact Statement
and invited public comment, as required under the Tunney Act.
Nine states and the District of Columbia are still holding out.
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37791-2001Nov15.html>
<http://eon.law.harvard.edu/msdoj/011106-proposed-settlement.html>
<http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/ms-settle.htm>
[2] DISPATCHES
================
On October 26 President Bush signed the USA Patriot Act into law,
a move that the ACLU's Laura Murphy argues goes "light years
beyond what is necessary to combat terrorism" and is likely to
result in "the mistreatment of immigrants, the suppression of
dissent, and the investigation and surveillance of wholly innocent
Americans."
How, specifically, is the USA Patriot Act and other new anti-terrorist
legislation impacting citizens' rights? Below we feature University
Week's Q & A session on the issue with Berkman Fellow Anita Ramasastry,
an assistant professor of law and associate director of the Shidler
Center for Law, Commerce and Technology at the University of
Washington in Seattle.
<http://depts.washington.edu/uweek/archives/2001.11.NOV_15/_article2.html>
[3] BERKMAN NEWS
================
* Building a Creative Commons: The Berkman Center is participating
in a new collaborative project called the "Creative Commons." The
goal of the project is to enrich the public domain by encouraging
and helping artists and other creators share their work with the
public on generous terms that permit copying, redistribution, and
creative reuses. Former Berkman Fellow Molly Shaffer Van Houweling
is the project's executive director, readying it for launch in
early 2002. For more information, contact Van Houweling at [log in to unmask]
* Edelman Exposes Filter Flaws: In the course of its pending challenge
to the Children s Internet Protection Act (CIPA), the ACLU asked
Berkman Affiliate Benjamin Edelman to document the capabilities and
flaws of four widely used Internet filtering programs. While a
protective order limits distribution of some portions of his expert
testimony, Edelman has posted a redacted version, complete with a
description of testing methodology, results, and final conclusions.
Check out the URL below to access a web page containing links
to background information, study data, and the testimony itself.
<http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/edelman/mul-v-us/>
[4] BOOKMARKS
================
* Fifth Annual Cato Institute/Forbes ASAP Technology and
Society Conference
<http://www.cato.org/events/futureip/program.html>
Website where you can access video archives of this month's
fifth annual Cato Institute/Forbes ASAP Technology and
Society Conference. Features keynotes by Representative Rick
Boucher (D-Va.) and EFF Co-Founder and Berkman Fellow John
Perry Barlow, as well as panel discussions on digital rights
management and criminal sanctions for hackers.
* Scripting News
<http://www.scripting.com>
Dave Winer s pioneer news website (weblog)--still savvy after all these
years.
* Consumer Project on Technology
<http://www.cptech.org>
Ralph Nader-founded consumer rights organization headed by James Love.
Focuses on "intellectual property rights and health care, electronic
commerce (broadly defined) and competition policy."
[5] QUOTABLE
================
"GPL is just as much an expression of power over users as any
proprietary license."
--Tim O' Reilly, founder and president of publishing company
O' Reilly & Associates, on "Freedom or Power?", a new essay by
free software evangelists Bradley Kuhn and Richard Stallman
(via Scripting News).
<http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/weblog/view/wlg/900>
"The only thing that keeps a given server on the air on
any particular day is that no teenager with a $300 computer
is angry enough at that server's operators to feel like
punishing them."
--Internet veteran and top security expert Paul Vixie, in an
email interview about his presentation at ICANN's recent annual
meeting in Marina del Rey, California.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/23/technology/23CYBE.html>
(Registration required.)
"Well...maybe we should convice [sic] some judge to create
a new 'cyber congress' with extraordinary powers of resistance
to soft money."
--Comment posted by Slashdotter "how_would_i_know," in response
to news that Virginia Governor James Gilmore had proposed the
establishment of a secret "cyber court" for online surveillance
of suspected terrorists, modeled on the court created under
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
<http://www.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/18/1534238>
<http://www.wired.com/news/conflict/0,2100,47676,00.html>
"You've seen a different version of that than I have."
--Justice Antonin Scalia during the Supreme Court's hearing
of Ashcroft v. The Free Speech Coalition, responding to Justice
John Paul Stevens' assertion that the movie "Romeo and Juliet"
falls under the category of "great works of art that would be
taken away from us if we were unable to show minors copulating."
<http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20011030/re/court_pornography_dc_1.html>
[6] TALK BACK
================
Comments? Questions? Opinions? Submissions?
Send a letter to the editor at [log in to unmask]
[7] SUBSCRIPTION INFO
================
You are receiving this email because someone (perhaps you)
requested that your name be added to our mailing list. Follow
this link to unsubscribe from the list:
<http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/filter/subscribe>
[8] ABOUT US
================
Read The Filter online at:
<http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/filter/>
Who we are:
Editor: Donna Wentworth
Reporter: Adam White
<http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/filter/about.html>
[9] NOT A COPYRIGHT
================
A publication of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at
Harvard Law School <http://cyber.law.harvard.edu>
You may--and please do--forward or copy this newsletter to friends
and colleagues.
[cc] <http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cc/cc.html>
************************************************************************************
Distributed through Cyber-Society-Live [CSL]: CSL is a moderated discussion
list made up of people who are interested in the interdisciplinary academic
study of Cyber Society in all its manifestations.To join the list please visit:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/cyber-society-live.html
*************************************************************************************
|
