'POLITICS'에 해당되는 글 6건

  1. 2009.03.26 Copyright as Politics and Business by CEOinIRVINE
  2. 2008.12.12 Your World View Doesn't Compute by CEOinIRVINE
  3. 2008.09.22 Democrats Seek Bailout Restraints by CEOinIRVINE
  4. 2008.09.19 McCain Reverts to Tax Attack by CEOinIRVINE
  5. 2008.09.16 Palin aide says Obama backers politicizing Alaska investigation by CEOinIRVINE
  6. 2008.09.15 McCain ad slams Obama, Senate Democrats on immigration by CEOinIRVINE

Copyright as Politics and Business

Are you picking up on a theme here? From the first copyright act of 1476 to the ruling in Donaldson v. Beckett three centuries later, copyright was primarily about business, ownership of intellectual content, and political maneuvering. It never really concerned itself much with authors' rights to control the dissemination of their intellectual property or to benefit financially from their published work. Furthermore, since the passage of the Statute of Anne over two centuries ago, it's been more and more of the same.

You don't need to know all the gruesome details of the history of copyright in the Western World. But if you're going to make sense of today's controversies, it helps to see the progression and understand the distinction between copyright and the right to copy.

Is the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) that much different from yesteryear's Royal Stationers Company? Are the software counterfeiters of China much different from the Scottish book bootleggers of 1700? Are authors who received a flat fee from their printers in Shakespeare's time much different from today's musicians who get royalties on their music only after promotion costs, marketing costs, printing costs, and innumerable administrative fees are deducted from revenues? Table 2-1, at the end of the chapter, offers up a smorgasbord of political shenanigans behind the history of copyright law.

Table 2-1. The Political History of Copyright
Date Event Outcome Political or Business Motivation
557 Columba copies Finnian's Psalter to use in his own monastery. King Diarmait orders him to return the copy to Finnian. There was previous bad blood between Columba and Diarmait; after the ruling, Columba supports an uprising in which Diarmait is killed.
1456 Gutenberg invents the printing press. Control of content moves from religious houses and individual authors or their patrons to owners of printing presses (which were scarce and expensive). The printing press creates a radical change in the price of making copies and in their quality, and shifts financial rewards from publishing to printers from authors (such as there were).
1476 First English copyright law Printers have to register what books or pamphlets they produce. The Crown wants to prevent the distribution of information unfavorable to the government and to obtain revenues from selling licenses.
1557 Company of Stationers of London incorporated under Queen Mary A long-time printer's guild gets royal sanction for an official monopoly on printing and begins controlling prices and distribution via a system of Stationers' Copyrights that could be bought, sold, or traded. Copyrights were perpetual (lasting for eternity). A Catholic monarchy gains additional control of content through prior censorship (the register) from a guild/company headed by a Roman Catholic.
1624 Statute of Monopolies Parliament abolishes guilds and assumes the responsibility of regulation in their market areas—the Stationers Company excepted. The Statute helps erode the power of the Crown (and increases that of Parliament) as the Crown makes money selling monopoly rights; now Parliament assumes the mantle of censor.
1695 Lapse of the licensing acts Parliament lets the last of the licensing acts which governed the rights of publication lapse, essentially abolishing prepublication censorship. However, under no copyright constraint, booksellers and printers in Scotland retypeset popular books from England and resell them at a lower price. Under pressure from vocal intellectuals such as John Milton and John Locke, Parliament lets the licensing acts lapse, but in practice nothing changes. The Stationers Company becomes a cartel, copyrights remain with publishers, and authors sell their material to the Stationers Company members for a flat fee. The increasing piracy from Scotland seems to be an unintended consequence.
1710 Statute of Queen Anne A new copyright law is created to prevent future bookseller monopolies, granting some rights to authors, and encouraging production of more work. The Queen brokers the treaty with Scotland, giving them some of the book trade in return for coming under the copyright law, and to ensure support against potential invasions from France or an uprising of Jacobites; the Stationers Company trades some market control for the ability to continue as a monopoly.
1769 Millar v. Taylor In a challenge to the Statute of Queen Anne, Taylor reprints a book published by Millar after the copyright runs out. Millar sues, claiming a perpetual copyright under common law. The court finds for Millar and for the first time asserts copyright under common law, clearly a promonopoly, probusiness, pro-Stationers' Company ruling.
1774 Donaldson v. Beckett A Scottish printer republishes the same book involved in Millar v. Taylor, challenging the ruling of Millar v. Taylor. This case goes to the full House of Lords, which is less inclined to support the Stationers Company monopoly and more inclined to assert the power of government. Donaldson wins, and copyright is determined to be a state-granted right or license, not a right given to authors by God.
1787 U.S. Constitution Article 1, Section 8 gives Congress the power to promote "science and the useful arts" through laws protecting intellectual property, but for limited time only. This is a compromise between promoting business (the exclusive rights), a position favored by James Madison, and guarding against the power of monopolies, a position favored by Thomas Jefferson.
1790 U.S. Copyright Act Act puts into law the intent of the Constitution and extends copyright to maps and charts. The term length is 14 years, renewable for another 14, for a total of 28. As a descendent of the Statute of Anne, U.S. copyright still favors publishers over authors.
1802 Extension to the Copyright Act Adds designs, engravings, etchings, and prints to copyright protection. Allows U.S. artists and engravers to make prints of classic works of art and resell them in the U.S. under copyright protection; encourages the distribution of cheaper European art in the States.
1804 Napoleonic Code Codifies post-French Revolution rule for business, including copyright. Introduces the concept of "moral rights" for authors. Splits author's rights into (1) economic rights and (2) moral rights. The former could be sold, licensed, etc. while the latter gives the author rights beyond the sale of economic rights in how the work can be displayed, edited, resold, etc.
1831 Extension to the Copyright Act Coverage for sheet music is added and the copyright period extended another 14 years (total of 42). Longer period of copyright favors owners (mostly publishers).
1834 Wheaton v. Peters Peters wants to publish a condensed version of his predecessor's reports, recordings, and notes of court proceedings, Wheaton sues. The court finds for Peters because Wheaton hadn't filed the right paperwork. In this decision the court establishes that the U.S. recognizes no "common law" rights for authors and that copyright is a monopoly granted by the state.
1841 Folsom v. Marsh Marsh republishes as excerpts 350 pages of a collection of George Washington's letters first published by Folsom; the courts find for Folsom. Establishes that there is a right to "fair use" of another's work—but that taking 350 pages verbatim is not fair use.
1853 Stowe v. Thomas A German publisher translates Harriet Beecher Stowe's Uncle Tom's Cabin into German and sells it in the U.S.; Stowe sues, but the courts find for Thomas. Although this keeps intact the idea that you can copyright expressions of ideas, but not the ideas themselves, it galvanizes American authors into pressuring Congress to add foreign translation to the copyright laws in 1870.
1856 Extension to the Copyright Act Right of performance of dramatic works.  
1865 Extension to the Copyright Act Photographs.  
1870 Copyright Act of 1870 Paintings, statues, fine arts, and translations are included. Codifies that U.S. copyright is a right granted by the state, not a right by natural law. Puts into law the concept established in Wheaton that no common law right to copyright exists.
1886 Berne Convention Extends copyright to authors outside the country of origin. Eventually offers protection of life plus 75 years, but also promotes concept of author's "moral rights." U.S. doesn't sign, preferring the shorter copyright span of the Copyright Act because of the freedom from author control of derivative or follow-on works.
1891 International Copyright Act (Chace Act) Copyright granted to non-U.S. citizens if reciprocated. Eastern publishers and printers finally support authors with Congress to protect business from lower-price Midwestern publishers.
1909 Copyright Act of 1909 First time all copyright laws are put into one bill. First sale doctrine codified. Also allows corporate copyright and work for hire. Extends copyright to 28 years, renewable for another 28, for a total of 56. Helps newspapers and later motion picture companies to get copyright protection, giving them the rights of persons. Also establishes rules for when authors are "work for hire" employees. This is the first time companies get the same rights as people.
1912 Extension of Copyright Act Gives copyright coverage to motion pictures after years of lawsuits under the 1870 Act. Blurs the separation of copyright protection for "expression" not "ideas." Even a "treatment" could be copyrighted. Screenwriters become employees and contract workers.
1955 Universal Copyright Convention Substitutes for signing the Berne Convention and covers only 28 years of protection (for foreign authors selling books in the U.S.). Enables the U.S. to offer minimal protection of foreign works without signing onto all the conditions of the Berne Convention.
1976 Copyright Act of 1976 Extends copyright to life of author plus 50 years; for anonymous works for hire, 75 years from publication, 100 years from year of creation. Sets the stage for signing the Berne Convention later and makes it easier for the U.S. to have reciprocal copyright agreements—important since the U.S. is not a net exporter of content.
1984 Betamax case Universal Studios and Disney sue Sony, maker of the Betamax video tape recorder. The case begins in 1979 with a ruling that home taping was "fair use," then is reversed on appeal in 1981 and reversed again in 1984 by a 5–4 majority of the Supreme Court. Public opinion was largely against the concept (jokes about "video police"), and experts thought enforcement would be difficult. Many countries, however, impose a tax on VCRs and blank tapes and pay the proceeds to the movie industry.
1988 U.S. signs Berne Convention. Extends U.S. copyright to life plus 50 years. U.S. signs in order to extend international copyright to life plus 70 years without major debate. Mickey Mouse is 60 years old at the time.
1998 Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act Extends the copyright coverage to life plus 70 years, mirroring many countries that are signatories to the Berne Convention. Gives U.S. publishers and authors reciprocal rights for those countries that also have 70-year copyrights; the Disney Corporation, whose copyright on Mickey Mouse in the cartoon Steamboat Willy is set to expire in 2003, spearheads lobbying Congress.
1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act The DMCA amends the Copyright Act by outlawing the use of techniques to prevent unauthorized copying and penalties for circumventing those techniques. The law mandates that hardware manufacturers build machines capable of recognizing copyright protection systems and sets the content industry against the MP3, VCR, CDR, and DVR industries.


The progression is not pretty, nor is it pure. But it is a progression. After a millennium and a half, it is a little easier for those who create intellectual work to reap some financial rewards from that work. A little.


'Hacking' 카테고리의 다른 글

Incident Reponse  (1) 2009.03.30
six questions on copyright for jonathan zittrain  (0) 2009.03.26
DMCA Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)  (0) 2009.03.26
Hacking Quiz (too easy.. for beginners)  (0) 2009.03.14
Positioning IDS Snort Sensor  (0) 2009.03.12
Posted by CEOinIRVINE
l

pic

Since computers are, if nothing else, starkly logical, for as long as they have been around, there have been people who have hoped that the machines might serve as an example to their human overlords, helping to make certain human affairs--politics, say--a little more logical too.

One of them is Scott Aaronson, a computer scientist at M.I.T. with an idea for a program designed to help people appreciate that the logical path they have just traveled in a political or other discussion might not have been entirely straight and narrow.

Despite being just 27 years old and in only the second year of his professorship, Aaronson is widely known in his field, quantum computing.

Quantum computers work in ways utterly different from conventional ones, and can do some tasks--breaking encryption, say--unimaginably quickly. So far, only small-scale, prototype quantum computers have been built, and it's not yet clear whether one big enough to be useful will ever be technically possible.

Aaronson's work involves quantum software, meaning, as members of his field like to say, that he spends his time thinking about programs for machines that might never get built.

One of his side projects, though, is a work-in-progress political program called the Worldview Manager. It has nothing to do with quantum machines or, indeed, of advanced computing of any sort. In fact, it's so simple and straightforward an idea that you could write it with macros in Excel.

The goal of Worldview Manager, explains Aaronson, is to help people appreciate the inconsistencies and contradictions that might crop up in their social and political beliefs.

Posted by CEOinIRVINE
l

Senate Banking Committee Chair Christopher Dodd, at right with Sen. Charles Schumer, says it might be possible may meet approve the bailout by Friday, but it might take longer.
Senate Banking Committee Chair Christopher Dodd, at right with Sen. Charles Schumer, says it might be possible may meet approve the bailout by Friday, but it might take longer. (By Richard A. Lipski -- The Washington Post
  Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, September 22, 2008; Page A01

Congressional Democrats considering the Bush administration's emergency plan to shore up the U.S. financial system yesterday countered with their own demands, presenting draft legislation giving the government power to cut salaries of chief executives at firms that participate in the bailout and slash severance packages for their top management.

Democratic leaders have broadly embraced the administration's proposal to spend up to $700 billion to take troubled assets off the books of faltering firms and are not questioning the need to give the Treasury Department expansive authority to halt the meltdown in world markets. But by attempting to limits executive pay, they risk alienating key Republicans who object to such restrictions and delaying passage of the rescue plan, which in turn may stir renewed fear in the markets.

Last night, the Federal Reserve said that the two remaining investment banks, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, will now be classified as regular commercial banks. That means that they will be subject to a broad and intensive set of government oversight rules that apply to regular banks. It also means that there are no remaining stand-alone investment banks.

There were five investment banks at the beginning of the year, but Bear Stearns was bought by commercial bank J.P. Morgan in the spring, Lehman Brothers has gone bankrupt, Merrill Lynch is being acquired by Bank of America, and now Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley are becoming commercial banks.

Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. was working last night to press House leaders to strike an agreement on the bailout bill by early Monday morning, according to three sources familiar with the matter. No deal with the Senate appeared close last night.

Sources familiar with Treasury's thinking said last night that the department is also continuing to monitor troubled financial firms and may have to intervene in the markets again this week, before Congress acts on the bailout, to address specific flashpoints.

Democrats sought to add oversight provisions and taxpayer protections to the proposal, which amounts to the largest government intervention in the private markets since the Great Depression. "We will not simply hand over a $700 billion blank check to Wall Street," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in a statement.

Under the proposal drafted by House Democrats, the Treasury would be required to force faltering firms that want to sell their troubled assets to the government to "meet appropriate standards for executive compensation." Those standards would include a ban on incentives that encourage chief executives to take "inappropriate or excessive" risks, a mechanism to rescind bonuses paid for earnings that never materialize and limits on severance pay.

Although Democrats have long sought to revamp the structure of compensation on Wall Street, their current demands are focused more narrowly on those financial firms choosing to avail themselves of the bailout.

The Democratic measure also would require the Treasury to use its status as the new owner of billions of dollars in mortgage-backed assets to reduce foreclosures by forcing banks to rewrite loans for distressed homeowners and forgive a portion of their debt. And it calls for a strict regimen of oversight, including independent audits and regular reports to Congress.

The proposal was presented to Treasury officials during marathon negotiating sessions this weekend over the bailout plan. House Republicans sent Treasury a separate set of demands, including the suggestion that a joint committee of Congress be created to oversee the program. And Senate Democrats yesterday were still assembling a list of provisions they hope to add, including new powers for bankruptcy judges to modify mortgages on primary residences, an idea House Democrats said yesterday that they had abandoned.

Though lawmakers had promised to work across party lines and between chambers to speed the rescue plan to passage by Friday, that process was not working smoothly.






Posted by CEOinIRVINE
l

 

McCain Reverts to Tax Attack

In politics, the more things change the more they stay the same.

With less than seven weeks remaining before the November presidential election, John McCain is turning to a tried and true tactic: attacking Barack Obama as a serial tax raiser who favors a "massive government".

McCain makes the case in a new ad released this morning:

"Obama and his liberal congressional allies want a massive government," insists the ad's narrator, adding that the Illinois senator favors "billions in spending increases" including "painful income taxes, skyrocketing taxes on life savings, electricity and home heating oil."

"Can your family afford that?" the narrator asks at the commercial's close.

McCain's campaign is also held a conference call today focused on the economy with the stated purpose of exploring Obama's "claims that paying higher taxes is 'patriotic'".

On that call, McCain senior policy adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin alleged that Obama has voted to raise taxes 94 times in the U.S. Senate and had proposed more than $800 billion in additional spending during the presidential campaign. "He has no credibility in his promises," insisted Holtz-Eakin.

The tax attack is not only rooted in decades of successful Republican campaigns -- from the statehouse to the White House -- but also backed by polling that seems to show people believe Obama would raise their taxes.

In the Washington Post/ABC News poll conducted earlier this month, more than half of those tested (51 percent) said that if Obama was elected federal taxes would go up; compare that to the 34 percent who said taxes would go up in a McCain Administration. The New York Times/CBS News poll released last night echoed the findings of the Post survey. Forty-nine percent said they believed their taxes would go up if Obama was elected president while 34 percent said their taxes would rise if McCain wins in November.

Given those gaps, it's easy to see why McCain is focusing on the issue in the final weeks of the race. As we have written many times before, successful political strategies are almost always rooted in playing on the preconceived notions about the two parties.

For Republicans, that means portraying Democrats as advocates of a nanny government that is involved in every part of your life and is funded by huge tax increases that take money from your pocket.

For Democrats, it's casting Republicans as favoring a go-it-alone, every-man-for-himself attitude and driving that message home specifically on domestic issues like health care and the economy.

The reality of the two candidates' economic plans then is secondary to the preconceived notions voters bring to the issues. (Again, we aren't saying this is the "right" way for politics to operate, merely acknowledging that it is the way politics works. Looking for a good, objective breakdown of what the McCain and Obama tax plans mean to you? CNN does it well.)

The big unknown when it comes to the tax question in this election is whether Obama's bet that people are, at their core, sick and tired of politics as usual is the right one. Obama has centered his campaign around the idea that the GOP attacks against Democrats that worked in the past won't work this time around due to the damage done to the Republican brand by President George W. Bush.

If Obama is right, McCain's attacks will fall on deaf ears as people will no longer see Republicans as credible messengers on the economy and taxes. That, in a nutshell, is what happened in the 2006 midterm elections when Republican candidates realized too late that casting their opponents as tax-and-spend liberals was not enough to win races.

Have things changed in the intervening two years? We'll know the answer to that question in 47 days.

By Chris Cillizza |  September 18, 2008; 11:23 AM ET  

Posted by CEOinIRVINE
l
She accused of improperly firing public safety commissioner.
Obama campaign says charge is "complete paranoia", though.

Why?

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (CNN) -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will not cooperate with a legislative investigation into the firing of her public safety commissioner, the McCain-Palin presidential campaign announced Monday, accusing supporters of Democratic rival Barack Obama of manipulating the inquiry for political motivations.

Gov. Sarah Palin is fighting allegations she improperly tried to force the firing of her former brother-in-law.

Gov. Sarah Palin is fighting allegations she improperly tried to force the firing of her former brother-in-law.

Former Palin Press Secretary Meg Stapleton told reporters in Anchorage that the investigation has been "hijacked" by "Obama operatives" for the Democratic presidential nominee -- namely, Alaska state Sen. Hollis French, the Democratic lawmaker managing the investigation and an Obama supporter. French has denied working on behalf of the Obama campaign.

The Obama campaign described Stapleton's charge as "complete paranoia." It has denied sending campaign staff to Alaska to work with the legislative committee's investigation.

McCain campaign spokesman Ed O'Callaghan said Palin will not cooperate with "that investigation so long as it remained tainted and run by partisan individuals who have a predetermined conclusion," referring to a comment by French earlier this month that the case could produce criminal charges or an "October Surprise" for the GOP ticket.

Palin, the Republican nominee for vice president, is battling allegations that she and her advisers pressured then-Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan to fire a state trooper going through a bitter custody dispute with her sister -- and that Monegan was terminated when he refused. Palin says she fired Monegan over budget issues and denies wrongdoing.

Monegan has said that while no one directly demanded Trooper Mike Wooten's dismissal, he felt pressured to do so by Palin, her husband and staff. He said he believes his refusal to fire the trooper led to his own firing. Upon the dismissal, Monegan was offered a position as executive director of the Alcohol Beverage and Control Board, but turned it down.

Palin's lawyers say the investigation -- which the Legislature commissioned on a bipartisan basis in July -- belongs before the state Personnel Board, which met to consider the request Thursday. On Friday, Alaska lawmakers voted to subpoena Palin's husband, several aides and phone records in their investigation.

Stapleton said Palin's attorneys have turned over to the board e-mails that contain "new information that exonerates Palin and proves Monegan's egregious insubordination."

Monegan allegedly worked against Palin over his department's budget, making repeated requests to Congress "for funding that was out of line for every other commissioner and agency," she said.

"The final straw came in late June, when Commissioner Monegan arranged for another unauthorized trip to D.C. to request more money from Congress," Stapleton said.

The campaign also disputed recent comments Monegan made to ABC News, in which he accused Palin of lying during her wide-ranging interview with ABC's Charles Gibson last week.

Palin told Gibson, "I never pressured him to hire or fire anybody." She said she welcomed the investigation and did not worry about the subpoena of her husband, Todd Palin.

"There's nothing to hide," she said. "I know that Todd, too, never pressured Commissioner Monegan. He did, very appropriately, though, bring up those concerns about a trooper [Wooten] who was making threats against the first family, and that is appropriate."

Monegan rebutted Palin's comments, saying, "She's not telling the truth when she told ABC neither she nor her husband pressured me to fire Trooper Wooten," according to an interview posted on ABC News.com. "And she's not telling the truth to the media about her reasons for firing me."

'Politics' 카테고리의 다른 글

McCain Reverts to Tax Attack  (0) 2008.09.19
Hackers Access Palin's Personal E-Mail, Post Some Online  (0) 2008.09.18
McCain  (0) 2008.09.17
Bright Ideas [Obama]  (0) 2008.09.17
McCain ad slams Obama, Senate Democrats on immigration  (0) 2008.09.15
Posted by CEOinIRVINE
l
I am Democratic,but I am really worry about the immigration policy.
It's very complicated. It might lead a lot of problems.

I don't believe what Obama will do.
However,I believe what Democratic party will come up with a good policy.

McCain went too far on this ad, though.

September 13, 2008
Posted: 09:49 AM ET

From
New McCain ad blames Obama and Democrats for death of immigration overhaul effort.
New McCain ad blames Obama and Democrats for death of immigration overhaul effort.


(CNN) –
John McCain’s campaign is running a Spanish language ad in battleground states that blames Barack Obama and Senate Democrats for the failure of attempts to overhaul the nation’s immigration laws — even though the Republican nominee and his Democratic counterpart cast identical votes in the key Senate showdowns on that issue last year

“Obama and his congressional allies say they are on the side of immigrants. But are they?” asks the announcer in the 30-second spot, “Which Side Are They On?”

“The press reports that their efforts were 'poison pills' that made immigration reform fail,” he continues. “The result: No guest worker program. No path to citizenship. No secure borders. No reform. Is that being on our side? Obama and his Congressional allies ready to block immigration reform, but not ready to lead.”

But Obama and McCain cast identical votes in the major congressional showdowns on the issue last year. Both men cast votes in favor of an unsuccessful early June effort to end a filibuster. Later that month, they voted again to end debate on the issue – but again failed to shut down the filibuster effort, led for the most part by Republican senators.

The ad will air in Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada, all crucial fall states with significant Hispanic voting populations.

'Politics' 카테고리의 다른 글

McCain Reverts to Tax Attack  (0) 2008.09.19
Hackers Access Palin's Personal E-Mail, Post Some Online  (0) 2008.09.18
McCain  (0) 2008.09.17
Bright Ideas [Obama]  (0) 2008.09.17
Palin aide says Obama backers politicizing Alaska investigation  (0) 2008.09.16
Posted by CEOinIRVINE
l