IPcentral Weblog: September 2006 Archives

September 2006 Archives

(previous | next)

09.29.2006

"The GPL is not a compromise"

is a counter-argument to the position of the Maintainers (and others). It makes cogent points, which is why I think the FOSS movement must split. There has never been a good fit between the FSFers, who believe that software really should be free, and the corporate types, who want to commodify operating systems as a way of providing a platform on which to hang money-making aps and services. And these are conflicts of moral principle on the FSF side versus huge financial stakes on the corporatist side. The latter cannot give way -- it would cost too much and render the whole enterprise pointless. And the FSFers can't give way because it would make the enterprise pointless from their perspective.

Personally, I am happy to see it, of course, because the conflict highlights the unworkability of the Free Culture Movement's models of peer-based production without regard for payment. Since the FCM regards open source software as a pilot program for all other creative products, ranging from music to movies, the quicker its weaknesses as a mode of production are rendered obvious, the sooner the debate can shift to real issues of how to define and protect IP rights in a time of great technological change. Where should they shrink, and where should they expand?

posted by James DeLong @ 9:06 AM | Software

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | TrackBacks (0)| Post a Comment (10)

IP Enforcement Report.

The National Intellectual Property Law Enforcement Coordination Council of the U.S. Department of Commerce released its Report to the President and Congress on Coordination of Intellectual Property Enforcement and Protection (Sept. 2006).

The press release provides the hightlights.

posted by James DeLong @ 8:46 AM | Enforcement & Remedies

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | | Post a Comment (0)

"Piracy is killing creators in the developing world"

says IPBlog. Cases in point: Burma and Uganda.

posted by James DeLong @ 8:36 AM | International

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | | Post a Comment (0)

09.28.2006

Nobody Said Innovating is Easy or Cheap...

There are costs and time consuming aspects of the innovation process, that those who criticize the likes of Apple and MSFT for wasting resources on, forget about. One of these deals with integration and interoperability.

Computer World reports that a recent survey of Australian CIOs found that "more than a quarter of the cost of implementing a new application is spent making it interoperable with existing applications..."

On the one hand, its good that the CIOs of Australia recognize the centrality of integration/interop in development. Too much commentary on technological innovation praises what companies like Apple and MSFT would called half-finished products: those that do not sufficiently go through the development phase, and thus lack key features and functions that consumers call for.

On the other hand, it should not come as a surprise to Australian CIOs that a good or innovative product entails more than just code or architectural design. This is often the pitfall of FOSS technologies (I know I know, those projects are ongoing and have benchmarks, but the general tendancy of FOSS proponents is to call certain FOSS technologies more innovative before they're done to any extent).

Professor Iansiti from Harvard Business School has done some good work on managing these intergration/interop in the innovation cycle.

posted by Noel Le @ 2:52 PM | Markets: Business, Investment & Innovation

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | | Post a Comment (0)

IBM and FOSS: When They First Got Together

Professor Pamela Samuelson from Berkeley has an article, in the forthcoming issue of Communications of the ACM, on IBM’s adoption of FOSS business strategies. My original reaction to Professor Samuelson’s foray into business and industrial history was: “don’t quit your day job.” However, Professor Samuelson does decently lay out the motivations and developments behind IBM buddying up with FOSS. Yet, if the history is anything, it is never as consistent, simple nor leading by coherent steps up to the present as the article may be interpreted to suggest for IBM and FOSS.

Of the three possible explanations that Professor Samuelson gives for IBM’s turn-about in the 1980s, only the first was likely on the mind of the talented Lewis Gerstner, as he pointed IBM towards FOSS. The second two arose as marketing ploys for IBM to convince customers, partners and consumers that it made the right decision.

There are at least three stories one can tell about this shift. IBM’s adoption of open source can be viewed: (1) as an anti-Microsoft strategy; (2) as a consequence of changed business models in the software industry; and (3) as a manifestation of an open innovation strategy for promoting faster and more robust technical advances.

Continue reading IBM and FOSS: When They First Got Together . . .

posted by Noel Le @ 11:15 AM | Free Culture Movement , Markets: Business, Investment & Innovation

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | | Post a Comment (0)

09.27.2006

Internet 2020

The 463: Inside Tech Policy examines the new Pew Foundation report.

posted by James DeLong @ 3:19 PM | Internet: P2P, Search Engines...

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | TrackBacks (0)| Post a Comment (0)

IBM's Open Patent Polcy Announcement , . . .

... is discussed at the Consortiuminfo.org Standards Blog.

posted by James DeLong @ 11:18 AM | Patents

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | | Post a Comment (0)

True Copyright Modernization

Now that the Copyright Modernization Act of 2006 has been put aside for this year, it has to be assumed that at least three of the four key copyright bills out there right now -- the Section 115 Reform Act, Orphan Works Act and the PERFORM Act -- are on hiatus. The first two were part of the CMA, and the third had issues that were addressed in CMA. (The audio flag remains a part of the Stevens telecom bill that is awaiting a Senate floor vote; Ted Stevens spoke on that bill last week at a PFF webcast, and you can see that here.)

What is often unspoken is that many of the conflicts occurring right now on copyright modernization with members of Congress, recording labels, music publishers, digital music services, broadcasters, recording artists, songwriters, etc., stem from a common curse -- that of compulsory licensing.

That is why, at the Vegas Music Conference last week, I called for an abolishment of all music compulsory licenses. PFF has published that speech today as a Progress Snapshot ; I encourage you to read it. You may not agree with it, but I think a case can be made that after an initial shock to the system, the market would guide all parties to voluntary licensing regimes that would reduce transaction costs; my former president Ray Gifford pointed out to me that transaction costs are already lower in a digital age. Congress would likely have to include some language ensuring that the intermediaries facilitating these voluntary licensing agreements weren't subject to strict antitrust regulation, but there's solid precedent for that.

Lamar Smith, someone who I respect and believe cares about artists' rights, has taken the high road and decided not to force his colleagues to vote on a bill that likely won't clear Congress this year. He vowed at today's markup to return with diligence next year. His ranking Democrat on the House IP Subcommittee, Howard Berman, vowed to join him, although Berman said he was pleased Smith was willing to wait until he -- Smith -- was the ranking member on the subcommittee.

When we return to this debate in January, perhaps the starting point should be the elimination of compulsory licenses. If that proves successful, we could target licenses in other industries, such as cable and satellite.

posted by Patrick Ross @ 11:14 AM | Legislation and Legislators

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | | Post a Comment (0)

House Judiciary IP Subcommittee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) has just announced at a full committee markup that he will table the Copyright Modernization Act of 2006 until next year. I will write on this more shortly.

posted by Patrick Ross @ 10:45 AM | Legislation and Legislators

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | | Post a Comment (0)

Begin the Beguine

The Institute for Trade, Standards, and Sustainable Development (ITSSD) has published Rediscovering the Value of Intellectual Property Rights: How Brazil’s Recognition and Protection of Foreign IPRs Can Stimulate Domestic Innovation and Generate Economic Growth, by Lawrence Kogan.

Summary: This article documents how the Brazilian government, assisted by ideological activists, academics and politicians, has brazenly led a bloc of emerging and less developed economies to craft a highly controversial anti-intellectual property right (IPR) legal framework that will undermine exclusive private property rights and free enterprise globally. The article provides evidence showing why Brazil should pursue 'bottom-up' IP-based innovation rather than 'top-down' IP opportunism to stimulate domestic innovation and generate economic growth.

Continue reading Begin the Beguine . . .

posted by James DeLong @ 7:33 AM | International

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | | Post a Comment (0)

09.27.2006

Congratulations! You Have Been Chosen as a P2P Supernode!

posted by James DeLong @ 7:20 AM | Internet: P2P, Search Engines...

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | | Post a Comment (0)

09.26.2006

Napster to Go Withdrawal

posted by Patrick Ross @ 5:21 PM | DRM & Watermarks, etc.

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | | Post a Comment (0)