Copyright 2.0 Show - Episode 54

By Jonathan Bailey • Apr 14th, 2008 • Category: Podcast

walmart logoIt was another wild week for copyright news as we again go around the world for the latest in intellectual property developments. We also cover a wide spate of topics from net neutrality to The Village People.

So, to help me sense of it all, I sat down with Chris Matthieu from Numly and we tore through the week’s copyright happenings with our usual mix of news, views and abuse.

This week’s stories include:

  • EU Calls Internet Access a “Human Right”
  • Demonoid Returns
  • Wal-Mart Gets Schooled on Work For Hire
  • The Cautionary Tale of The Verve
  • The Village People Aim for Dumbest DMCA Notice Ever
  • And Many more…

You can download the MP3 file here (direct download). Those interested in subscribing to the show can do so via this feed.

Show Notes

Jonathan Bailey is The Webmaster and author of Plagiarism Today, which he founded in 2005 as a way to help Webmasters going through content theft problems get accurate information and stay up to date on the rapidly-changing field. He is also a consultant to Webmasters and companies to help them devise practical content protection strategies and develop good copyright policies.
Email this author | All posts by Jonathan Bailey

2 Responses »

  1. According to Darren Cauthon on April 14th, 2008 at 7:48 pm:

    Hi guys, I listened to the podcast and read the article about the French politician who considers internet access to be a “human right.” Personally, I have a problem calling anything that is a product of another individual’s work as a “right.”

    Internet access is just like food, automobiles, cell phones, email, employment, or chocolate: They’re essential things that a lot of people need to life a happy life, but it’s each person’s responsibility to earn each of them. Access to the internet requires a lot of hard work and expensive investments by companies and individuals. If a potential customer wants to use their work to get on the internet, he or she should have to meet their terms.

    So I don’t buy the idea that the government (or an ISP) can’t take away a music pirate’s internet access. Maybe an argument can be made about the actions a government should take in copyright enforcement, but a pirate’s supposed “right” to the connection he uses to steal other people’s intellectual property shouldn’t be an issue.

    And this comment isn’t against anything specific you guys said, it’s just about a story you guys brought up. Take care!

  2. According to Jonathan Bailey on April 16th, 2008 at 4:26 pm:
    Darren:

    I have to agree with you. We made some jokes about it on the air but I do get where you are coming from.

    It seems to me that, if we’re going to start calling possessions and access to things a right, then we need to start with things that are fundamental to survival. Food and medicine are clear choices, but even things such as a car are more important to one’s survival than the Web.

    I would buy a free speech argument, but free speech is just as possible off the Web as on. Just like it is as possible without a megaphone as with.

    Personally, I think that a right is a bit strong of a word. Though I think that the gov’t should be limited in its ability to take away any property, it does clearly have the right to do so when needed.

    So, yes, though the sentiment gives one the warm and fuzzies, it really is taking things a bit too far… I agree.

Leave a Reply