Friday, September 23, 2005

Why His Peers Say Kozlowski Got Off Easy. Dennis Kozlowski is lucky that his sentence was not determined by a jury of his peers. By FLOYD NORRIS. [NYT > Business] 7:29:57 AM    comment []

Letter From an Ivy League Mother Who Can Do Math. The New York Times printed my Letter to the Editor today about the galling article I described in the previous post.   article: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/20/national/20women.html?incamp=article_popular letter: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/22/opinion/l22women.html The Times printed 11 letters on the topic. Wish more of them had questioned the basic premise about women, education and work eg. their place is in the home. [Girl in the Locker Room!] 7:29:56 AM    comment []

Blogging Survey - On Bloggers. [Qumana Blog] 7:24:51 AM    comment []

New York Times meets the Darknet. The New York Times launched its Times Select program, which locks certain content behind a for-pay subscription barrier. But as Wired reports, not all of the content behaved. Some ended up on the Web pages of newspapers which syndicate those stories, and who webbed them up accordingly. For example, a Maureen Dowd column ended up here, republished by the Austin Chronicle. JD Lasica writes of the darknet, the sphere of non-licit content sharing, and of how it is powered up by increasingly powerful, easy to use technologies. It becomes easier for a growing number of people to make, share, and mix digital media. Case in point: a blogger named John Tabin launched a website for people to find non-Select syndicated content. Moreover, as Tabin points out, people often copy and paste stories into emails, some of which end up in Web archives. Some don't, but move from email boxes to handheld devices. What about educational class Websites? Brewster Kahle's Internet Archive? How aggresively will the NYT pursue its migratory content across the Darknet? [Smart Mobs] 7:24:29 AM    comment []

RIAA to Congress: Give Us Control of Digital Radio (Donna Wentworth). Mike Godwin has the scoop on the recording industry's new bid to assert control over radio broadcasts, in an effort to stop you from doing things like "[automatically copying] particular recordings of the user's choice, thereby transforming a passive listening experience into a personal music library often without even listening to the original broadcast." In other words, it's worried that you'll have a TiVo for radio. And it believes that by citing fears of digital "theft" of free radio broadcasts -- which have never copy-protected -- it can persuade Congress to stop TiVo for radio from happening. Or, to be more precise, to stop it from happening without being able to control it. It's already decided, for example, that people shouldn't be able to automatically search for and record songs by a particular artist. But after the Broadcast Flag smackdown, it needs Congress to give the FCC explicit authority to make it so. Writes Fred von Lohmann @ Deep Links: [The] music industry is basically saying that, where recording from next-generation radio is concerned, government must step in and freeze innovation to ensure that you can never do anything that you couldn't do with an analog cassette deck in 1984. This, despite the fact that Congress specifically approved of digital recording off the radio in the Audio Home Recording Act in 1992. So this is about stopping music fans from doing things that are perfectly legal under copyright law. For more on why a Broadcast Flag-style regime for digital radio is a bad idea, check out Public Knowledge President Gigi Sohn's opinion piece from last spring, Say No to a Radio Broadcast Flag. [Copyfight] 7:24:19 AM    comment []