Sunday, April 27, 2003

Smart Mobs says Happy 10th Mosaic. Ten years ago , software developers at the University of Illinois released Mosaic, which opened the World Wide Web to the masses. Mosaic was released in April 1993 by the school's National Center for Supercomputing Applications as free software. It became the foundation for today's Web browsers, such as Microsoft's Internet Explorer and Netscape Communications' Communicator On Tuesday, April 29, 2003, the National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign will host a panel to explore the future of computing and networking. The Future Frontier 10:07:06 PM    comment []

explodedlibrary.info has a great post too long to do more than excerpt: truth and lies in public discourse: Fox, Nike and Kamiya. This week I’ve musing about truth and lies in public discourse. They are quite different issues but it is ironic that as Salon’s Gary Kamiya is being castigated for his extremely honest and courageous essay about the fall of Baghdad, we see companies such as Fox News and Nike go to court to preserve their right to mislead the public. 1. Distorting the News The courts have officially ruled that it is okay for television news to lie and distort the truth. Accepting a defense rejected by three other Florida state judges, a Florida appeals court has reversed the $425,000 jury verdict in favor of journalist Jane Akre. . . . [Reader Weekly, Duluth Minnesota] First, for the lawyer types, the case is New World Communications of Tampa vs. Akre, 2003 WL 327505, 28 Fla. L. Weekly D460. The issue before the court was not whether broadcasters are allowed to mislead the public. Rather, it involved interpreting 448.102, Fla. Stat. (Supp. 1998), Florida’s private-sector whistler-blower law. . . . . . . If the facts in New World Communications of Tampa vs. Akre are correct, it seems pretty clear that the Fox affiliate engaged in the “top down” management-mandated distortion which the FCC was concerned about here: Rigging or slanting the news is a most heinous act against the public interest -- indeed, there is no act more harmful to the public's ability to handle its affairs Violations of this news distortion policy are only relevant when the FCC is deciding whether to renew a broadcaster’s license. There are no other legal consequences for distorting the news and misleading the public. And can anyone imagine that the current FCC, headed by Michael Powell would give a Fox affiliate even a slap on the wrist for distorting the news? . . . 2. Nike's Right to Mislead The Christian Science Monitor has a good summary of the facts and issues involved (thanks to Howard Bashman for that cite ): The case, to be heard Wednesday, centers on Nike's ability to participate in public debate over its foreign business operations - which critics call dangerous and immoral - without being held liable for any false or misleading statements. The question is whether Nike is engaging in commercial speech, which is subject to civil charges if found to be false, or political speech, which enjoys greater protection under the First Amendment. . . . I think that all corporate speech is advertising of some kind – whether to consumers or investors. In the company where I used to work, public relations was actually inside the marketing department. When the news about Nike’s sweatshop practices first came out, I decided to avoid Nike products. But if I heard convincing information from them that they had cleaned up their act, I’d be inclined to consider them again. In fact, I’d be more likely to trust information that did not obviously appear to be advertising. The point is that these statements do have an effect in the marketplace, therefore they should be regulated according to the rules of the marketplace. 3. Honesty will be distorted and used against you The treatment of Gary Kamiya’s article is different from the two court cases which I’ve mentioned, but it is also concerns distortion and the place of honesty or dishonesty in public discourse. . . . Argument, analysis, and stuff you didn't already know, rolled in with things you've read about lately, in a tasty-and-good-for-you-too soft shell. Great. 10:00:53 PM    comment []

Blockbuster Decides to Go Online. As Blockbuster moseys online, two competitors are already running hard. But will that matter? By Bob Tedeschi. [New York Times: Business] 9:53:01 PM    comment []

Here's yet another intellectual property angle. Legal threat churns yoga style's harmony: Royalties sought for 'Bikram' poses. By Jason Blevins, Denver Post. Call it McYoga, an attempt to standardize and protect a yoga technique Choudhury has taught for three decades, just as burger meister Ray Kroc set out to deliver the same Big Mac in thousands of towns around the globe. And note it as the apex of the persistent Westernization of an ancient Eastern practice that is shedding its primary spiritual component as it flexes and twists its way westward. . . . I left corporate America to become a yoga teacher. Oh, I had such high expectations. Ethics, contentment, honesty, unity, [Suzanne] Matthews [a 45-year yoga practitioner who has been teaching yoga in Denver for eight years and heads Yoga Teachers of Colorado] says. Every time I see an occurrence of backbiting and corporate greed in the yoga world it really sets me back. I would love to be the person who ends up being a defendant if this ends up going to jury. I would love to ask how a 56-year-old man can own a 2,000- year-old yoga pose. . . . His devout proteges have opened 330 schools worldwide, including 16 in Colorado. His wealth, which includes a fleet of Rolls Royces, is estimated at $7 million. In February, Choudhury obtained a copyright for his sequence of poses and immediately threatened legal action against studios that violate the copyright. In addition to exact copying of the sequence, the copyright prohibits others from creating derivative works of the sequence, wrote Choudhury's attorney, Jacob Reinbolt. Virtually all modifications or additions to the sequence will constitute copyright infringement. . . . Bikram studios in Colorado and elsewhere offer only Choudhury's sequence. He requires that studio owners be Bikram trained and certified, and they must adhere to a strict list of regulations. A specific dialogue must be followed during the 90-minute classes. No music and no other types of yoga can be offered. He wants Bikram studios to use specific colors and have all websites link through his own website. He wants to handle almost all the details, including printing brochures for the network of Bikram studios. . . . It's a dilemma, isn't it? Yoga is about communication and growth and expansion. So there's sort of a mixed message going on, says Armstrong, who recently extricated herself from the Bikram camp. His commitment to us 10 years ago was that we had graduated and we were free to go out and teach Bikram. In my heart, there's no conflict. . . . If he's able to enforce this copyright on a yoga technique or sequence, then the yoga practice in general will be in danger of endless litigation, says Jim Harrison, attorney for the Choudhury-fighting Yoga Unity, which is generating support from across the nation. . . . A Manhattan federal court ruled in 2000 that a New York City studio did not have exclusive rights to the word, Pilates, despite the owner trademarking the name and claiming exclusive ownership over the exercise program. The judge found that Pilates, like yoga and karate, is a type of exercise in the public domain and cannot be trademarked. For Choudhury to successfully prove copyright infringement, he faces several hurdles, says Bruce L. Plotkin, an attorney with Denver's Brownstein Hyatt & Farber and an adjunct law professor at the University of Denver. Those hurdles include proving originality and creativity. A copyright registration from the U.S. Copyright Office does not exclude a court from ruling against its validity, Plotkin says. If the poses are not original, then it is his sequencing and selection of them that has to be sufficiently original, Plotkin says. The Supreme Court has required a minimum level of creativity in the selection, coordination and arrangement to justify the copyright. 9:56:23 AM    comment []

I missed blinking this when I saw it in the paper yesterday. RIP, Charles Douglass 93: Charles Rolland Douglass, the inventor of the Laff Box, which has been supplying recorded audience reaction for television shows since the 1950's, died on April 8 in Templeton, Calif. He was 93. Mr. Douglass, known as Charlie, was working as a technical director for live shows in the early days of television when he had the idea of developing a "laugh machine" to enhance or substitute for live audience reaction. He could "sweeten" programming soundtracks with degrees of laughter, gasps and other responses even when there was no audience. 7:12:46 AM    comment []

And once more on the media concentration theme, from Adam Curry: bbc against us ownership of media properties. Greg Dyke, director general of the BBC: We must ensure that we don't become Americanised. 7:10:57 AM    comment []

Mavericks Depend on Decimal Points. An Indiana University professor and his friend have been advising the Dallas Mavericks about which lineups to use and which free agents to sign. By David Leonhardt. [New York Times: Education] 7:06:13 AM    comment []

Lessig: MediaCon: Independence. One important issue that the change in market structure affects is the independence of creativity. Because of the repeal of network ownership rules, there has been a dramatic change in the ownership of pilot shows on major networks. This graph shows the change. In 1990, the overall percentage was 11.3%. In 2002, that had increased seven-fold -- to 70.2%. How might this matter? Some of the most important television has been produced by independents. "All in the Family," for example, created by Norman Lear, was created because Lear could say no to network executives who wanted to tame his creation to fit the network image. The future: fewer Lears likely. Here's the data for new series:1990 -- 12.5% owned; 2002 -- 77.5% [Lessig Blog] This was one of the points Lessig was making in his closing keynote at CFP2003 a few weeks ago. It bears our notice. And just when you think, "Ah, but the Miracle of Internetworking Technology will allow a hundred new Lears to flourish," stop and think. First ask yourself, "Okay, self, so where are they already?" Take a minute to work through the ramifications of that question -- I mean, notice that even the Big Content folks don't have the Internet Lear thing going, though they've been promising it for the better part of a decade now. Next, come back, come back. Now think about the moves that the content industries are making to disrupt the historically open, two-way, low-barrier-to-entry, interactive, democratic Net. Bears attention. Warrants action. More info: Fabulous Introduction to FCC Media Ownership Rules from Writers Guild of America, East explains the practical effects of the rule -- great place to start for a clear overview of the situation the FCC is meaning to alter Media Ownership page at the Center for Digital Democracy Consumers Union media ownership page Tell Your Elected Officials to Protect Media Diversity FCC Media Ownership Policy Reexamination page Media Consolidation/Encouraging Diversity of the Electronic Media from the Media Access Project, and To file public comments in this proceeding, use ECFS Express or go to ECFS and enter "02- 277" in the "Proceeding" box and complete the other required information. (Though it tells me ECFS File Upload is only available with Netscape Version 3.0 and Internet Explorer Version 4.0 compatible Browsers. I'm using Opera. So be warned about this technologically advanced FCC.) How long to inform yourself a little more? Five minutes? Ten? To send comments: a few more. 7:05:07 AM    comment []

Rx for Music Industry: Seek Out the Old Geezers. Record companies should tweak their product and marketing strategy, and aim at the people who have at their disposal more money than time. By Harry Shearer. [New York Times: Business] 6:35:35 AM    comment []

Why Marie blogs. 6:32:29 AM    comment []

A Post Mortem on Napster. In a new book, Shawn Fanning, the creator of Napster, comes across as relatively mature compared with investors whose greed is blamed for hastening the company's demise. By Matt Richtel. [New York Times: Technology] 6:31:45 AM    comment []

Freedom Fries on why SARS may become the seminal event of our lives, and possibly of this entire new century. 6:30:51 AM    comment []

Fifty years of the double helix. BBC by way of [NewsIsFree: Popular Items] 6:29:17 AM    comment []

From China's Provinces, a Crafty Germ Spreads. Hints about the origin of SARS provide lessons in how a disease that has spread worldwide could have been stopped. By Elisabeth Rosenthal. [New York Times: Science] 6:27:26 AM    comment []

Harry Potter author richer than Queen. Via [NewsIsFree: Popular Items] 6:26:53 AM    comment []

Child Care Woes Can Make for a Sticky Summer. For working parents, coordinating summer child care can be a logistical nightmare. But there are ways to make the process easier. By Melinda Ligos. [New York Times: Education] 6:24:45 AM    comment []

Webby Awards ceremony canceled. The poor economy and fears about traveling are blamed for the cancellation of the normally flamboyant ceremony. Instead, the winners will be announced on the Internet. [CNET News.com] 6:23:43 AM    comment []

Music, the Self, and Internet2 (two years ago on t'other blog): On Anthology of American Folk Music, compiled by Harry Smith: Copying Styles, Stealing Riffs What about Internet2? (a mess of links I tossed together) Three Benton headlines Does the fair use doctrine of copyright law, which permits uncompensated use of copyrighted works in some circumstances, such as in teaching, research and news gathering, entitle the scholar, reporter or others to gain access to the copyrighted work in the first place -- especially when the material is guarded by a technological device designed to prevent digital piracy? Universal City Studios v. Reimerdes. In the face of strong objections from the recording industry, a group of computer scientists who had successfully defeated an industry copy-protection system abruptly withdrew the paper detailing their research from a scientific conference yesterday. Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist David Halberstam, said that online communication partially responsible a breakdown in family and community relationships. I think more and more people in this country feel less and less connected, he said. We aren't connected really to work. We haven't served in military units together. There is less and less texture, and people feel more frustrated. [Exercise for the reader: find the ''online communication'' part in that. Good luck.] Hahahahahahaha. RIAA and SDMI now say they never did intend to sue Professor Felton over his digital watermarking research. (See above, earlier this week and last fall in X-Ray Net.) For the record, the Recording Industry Association of America, one of the founding members of SDMI, strongly believes in academic freedom and Freedom of Speech. MICROSOFT SAID ON Thursday that files on one of its Web servers had been infected by a virus and could have been downloaded by customers of its corporate support services in the United States. 3:37:04 AM    comment []