Comments on: Calling on the lazyweb

By: awurrlu

awurrlu — Tue, 17 Jan 2006 14:37:33 +0000

This interesting and pretty readable piece from HP tackles the privacy part:

Usability and privacy: a study of Kazaa P2P file-sharing
http://www.hpl.hp.com/research/idl/papers/kazaa/

It is a few years old, though…

By: Henry

Henry — Sun, 15 Jan 2006 18:27:49 +0000

Thanks for the suggestions all, although nothing really there that was exactly what I’m looking for. The Spinello is close – but the Lockean take on property may be a little too much for undergraduates w/o a political theory background. The Liebowitz reading is good, but too measured and empirically based – he doesn’t stick the shiv in, like he does with the PD stuff. But thanks again.

By: Charly

Charly — Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:34:26 +0000

TV-series, most of them are broadcast first and then sold on DVD. Or to put it differently. You can tape them for free. So no. I don’t think Pirate2Pirate will kill the DVD. Especially when the quality is a little bit worse then DVD

By: Crooked Timber » » Battletipjar Galactica

Crooked Timber » » Battletipjar Galactica — Sun, 15 Jan 2006 04:10:02 +0000

[...] Seems relevant to Henry’s bleg for P2P-is-bad stuff; except it’s yet another P2P-is-good piece. Henley’s post didn’t garner so many comments, but I’m genuinely curious what people think. It sounds like a pretty good rebuttal to the ‘yes it works for music, but couldn’t it kill TV and film?’ One possible objection is that "the simple fact that people do not expect to pay for television programs" is not so simple. (See first paragraph.) Does anyone know how significant the revenue from DVD sales is for TV series? (If you check out DVD bestsellers, it seems about half are for TV.) Maybe BitTorrent giveaways would kill that. [...]

By: derrida derider

derrida derider — Sun, 15 Jan 2006 03:58:02 +0000

Enough of this casuistry, abb1! It is the inention in the heart that matters, not the mere accidental effects.

As St Gates of Redmond wrote “He that installeth non-conforming software, though he avoid actual the heinous sin of its use, hath wilfully exposed himself to the occasion of sin. The lord shall be pissed and smite him with unexplained hangs.” The point is that wilful exposure to the occasion of sin is a sin in itself.

By: abb1

abb1 — Sat, 14 Jan 2006 18:50:34 +0000

If it is a matter of life and death, one may consume as many files as necessary for survival, otherwise it is simple theft of property.

But file sharing as such does not necessarily have anything to do with any theft of property. IP is a related but separate issue.

By: Ted

Ted — Sat, 14 Jan 2006 17:48:10 +0000

I half-wrote a long post on this very topic, which leaned heavily on posts from the punk rock musicians Dr. Frank and Ben Weasel. (They're aganst it.) I never finished my own post, but here's Ben Weasel: (1) and (2). And here's Dr. Frank: (1), (2) and (3).

By: Bro. Bartleby

Bro. Bartleby — Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:34:10 +0000

‘He who shares my file has lifted up his heel against me.’

That is the ultra-orthodox reading of the text, the orthodox reading is:

‘If it is a matter of life and death, one may consume as many files as necessary for survival, otherwise it is simple theft of property.’

The Council of Gaterian clarified the issue with:

‘If it is a matter of tenure, one may consume as many files as necessary for survival, in no case will it be considered theft.’

By: Tyler Cowen

Tyler Cowen — Sat, 14 Jan 2006 13:03:22 +0000

Try Stanley Liebowitz…

By: Chris Bertram

Chris Bertram — Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:54:38 +0000

Play them Gillian Welch singing “Everything is Free”.

http://tinyurl.com/5ra9a

By: jerome langguth

jerome langguth — Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:50:20 +0000

You might check out the online writings of Robert Fripp, the guitarist and founder of the “progressive rock” outfit King Crimson. Fripp is a mighty articulate and persuasive fellow, and as I recall he takes a dim view of things like filesharing, etc. You can take a look at his diary on the Discipline Mobile Global website (his record company).

Jerome Langguth

By: Luc

Luc — Sat, 14 Jan 2006 03:01:23 +0000

Putting some references found in technical stuff in (scholar.)google, you’ll get to Richard Spinello.

An example here.

A bit too much for me though.

By: JohnLopresti

JohnLopresti — Sat, 14 Jan 2006 02:17:13 +0000

Perhaps the problem is your blogroll, where I note the v-conspirator and L-Solum: one needs to take the corporate view in these matters if one is to aspire to hearing the burnished western boardroom view. And while Volokh and Solum might support the contra-p2p view, they downplay it on their websites.
Now, I would ask myself why would p2p be the essence?—aha, of course, the students: these are impecunious youth among whom one benefit of p2p is its baseline thriftiness; of course, there are other paradigms, as in iconoclastic youth sharing their generation’s own music.
To reply to your point, I had a strange disaffected reaction upon visiting a tech site whereat editors, in the true tradition of editors everywhere mostly, were grasping at paeans for the corporate sponsors at http://arstechnica.com/index.ars
That site has a blog that is comprised somewhat of a lot of hackers impressing each other with acronyms and knowledge of rude verbal expressions; but the site’s demographic also includes attorneys and engineers; quite a pot pourri of intellect; so the blog host can be knowledgeable of tech, but need not provide a modern liberal viewpoint, and may opt to let the participants provide that proletarian flavor; and rest assured they provide quite a lively and informed blog. I discovered the site during the first blush after the datamining government snooping scandal appeared in the media last month; arstecnica was full of nonchalant observations that this stuff has been around for ten years so what’s-the-surprise. There were some more cerebral viewpoints on that topic amid the long threads of blogdom there. The site’s frontpage, however, is a mix of silicon valley news, editorial content, and the like; and there are some opinions there taking the view of the corporate defender of intellectual property. You might try a google search for Sony + p2p; I think Sony recently issued a corporate commentary in the matter of its DVD crypto key software’s having a DOS-attack bug, wherefore finally they have announced they will discontinue use of that particular scheme of copy protection; but in their rhetoric there may be some diplomatic words espousing the profitmaking view which you are attempting to find. I am not sure the consumer branch of Sony is as sophisticated as its electronics test divisions, but you might find some suitable solid corporate law views there. Of course, Findlaw is replete with copyright advocacy; their site is redesigned, and it takes a little clicking to find your discussion area. They use flowery language, though; may be ill suited to your classwork; depends on your students’ profile.
In a humorous view: How about checking the website of the US Trade representative: he is on the record as defending US intellectual property interests in tough bargaining ongoing in the Far East, recently in the WTO talks; and obtained great concessions in that regard while Korean farmers protested along the pier. It is a classic negotiation issue between Singapore and the US, as well.
Well, I thought it was funny.
John L.

By: mrjauk

mrjauk — Sat, 14 Jan 2006 01:20:48 +0000

Kieran beat me to it. According to David Horowitz, Henry, you (or your type) don’t even exist, so I’m not certain whether I should take this post seriously as it most likely was written by someone who is most certainly not a university professor in the US.

By: abb1

abb1 — Sat, 14 Jan 2006 00:56:32 +0000

Yes, here it is:

‘He who shares my file has lifted up his heel against me.’

—the direct proof of the wickedness of file-sharing.