<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>JOLT Digest &#187; Flash Digest</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/category/flash-digest/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest</link>
	<description>JOLT Digest offers up-to-date information on current events in law and technology.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 03:03:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Flash Digest: News in Brief</title>
		<link>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/telecommunications/flash-digest-news-in-brief-28</link>
		<comments>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/telecommunications/flash-digest-news-in-brief-28#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Nov 2009 17:09:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jmilkey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Anonymity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Communications Commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[First Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flash Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telecommunications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tyler Lacey]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/?p=314</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Tyler Lacey
Convicted Murderer Demands that Wikipedia Remove His Name from Victim’s Article
On November 11, Wired reported that a convicted murderer in Germany has issued a cease-and-desist letter demanding that Wikipedia remove his name from his victim’s Wikipedia article. Wolfgang Werle murdered Bavarian actor Walter Sadlmayr in 1990, and was released on parole in 2007. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By Tyler Lacey</p>
<p><strong>Convicted Murderer Demands that Wikipedia Remove His Name from Victim’s Article</strong></p>
<p>On November 11, Wired <a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/11/wikipedia_murder/">reported</a> that a convicted murderer in Germany has issued a cease-and-desist letter demanding that Wikipedia remove his name from his victim’s Wikipedia article. Wolfgang Werle murdered Bavarian actor Walter Sadlmayr in 1990, and was released on parole in 2007. The letter demands legal fees and compensation for “emotional suffering” caused by the publication of Werle’s name in connection with the murder since his release. German media have already stopped using Werle’s name. Since Wikipedia is an American organization, the Electronic Frontier Foundation <a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/11/murderer-wikipedia-shhh">describes</a> the issue as “an apparent conflict between the U.S. First Amendment — which protects truthful speech — and German law — which seeks to protect the name and likenesses of private persons from unwanted publicity.”</p>
<p><strong>Senator Criticizes Verizon’s Increased Cancellation Fees as “Anti-Competitive”</strong></p>
<p>On November 10, Ars Technica <a href="http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2009/11/verizons-350-early-termination-fee-rubs-senator-wrong-way.ars">reported</a> that United States Senator Amy Klobuchar <a href="http://klobuchar.senate.gov/newsreleases_detail.cfm?id=319787&amp;">wrote</a> a letter to Verizon, criticizing the company’s announced increase in early cancellation fees for cell phone contracts. Verizon recently announced that, beginning November 15, the fee for cancelling a subsidized smartphone contract would double from a maximum of $175 to $350. Senator Klobuchar, who is a proponent of the Cell Phone Consumer Empowerment Act, called the increase “anti-consumer and anti-competitive.” Senator Klobuchar also wrote a letter to the FCC, asking for an investigation into the competitive and economic impact of the decision on consumers. Verizon noted that consumers can avoid the early termination fees by purchasing smartphones without Verizon subsidies.</p>
<p><strong>United Kingdom Proposes Mandatory Surveillance of Social Networks, Chat Rooms, and Video Games</strong></p>
<p>On November 9, the BBC <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8350660.stm">reported</a> the United Kingdom government has proposed that communication service providers retain records from a variety of new sources including social networks, chat rooms and online games. The move is designed to monitor the parties to and date of each online communication, but not the “actual contents of what was said.” Specific legislation has not yet been introduced, but the proposal includes compensation for the communications providers that must implement the technically challenging requirements. The government has insisted that most concerns about the proposal have only to do with the “detail of what would be done with the information.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/telecommunications/flash-digest-news-in-brief-28/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Flash Digest: News in Brief</title>
		<link>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/copyright/307</link>
		<comments>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/copyright/307#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:38:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jmilkey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Agency Rulemaking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[District Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Communications Commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flash Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Andrew Jacobs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/?p=307</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Andrew Jacobs
Court Issues TRO Against Sales of Beatles Music “Simulation”
Ars Technica reports that on November 5, a Central District of California judge issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) against BlueBeat.com, a website offering 25-cent downloads and free streaming of thousands of copyrighted songs, most notably including the entire Beatles catalog. The order is part [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By Andrew Jacobs</p>
<p><strong>Court Issues TRO Against Sales of Beatles Music “Simulation”</strong></p>
<p>Ars Technica <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/11/judge-hits-beatles-mp3-seller-with-restraining-order.ars">reports</a> that on November 5, a Central District of California judge issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) against BlueBeat.com, a website offering 25-cent downloads and free streaming of thousands of copyrighted songs, most notably including the entire Beatles catalog. The order is part of a suit filed on November 3 by Capitol, EMI, Priority, and Virgin Records, claiming copyright infringement and various state law violations. In its ill-received opposition to the TRO, BlueBeat asserted in part that the sound recordings it sells were not copied from the originals, but instead were “independently developed” through a “psycho-acoustic simulation” process.</p>
<p><strong>New York Files Suit Against Intel</strong></p>
<p>New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo filed an antitrust lawsuit against Intel on November 4, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/05/technology/companies/05chip.html?_r=1&amp;scp=2&amp;sq=intel&amp;st=cse">The New York Times</a> and <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/04/AR2009110402015_2.html">The Washington Post</a> report. The complaint focuses on Intel’s relationships with Dell, Hewlett-Packard, and IBM, asserting that the company has used what amounts to coercion and bribery to ensure the use of its chips over those of its main competitor, Advanced Micro Devices. This is the second antitrust action taken against Intel in the U.S — the first, an FTC administrative complaint, was filed in 1998 and later settled. Since 2005, however, Intel has battled and lost antitrust disputes in the EU, Japan, and South Korea.</p>
<p><strong>Anti-Net Neutrality Bill Introduced in House</strong></p>
<p>On October 30, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) introduced a House bill that would ban the FCC from issuing “any regulations regarding the Internet,” PCMag.com <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2355059,00.asp">reports</a>. The bill came eight days after the FCC issued its proposed net neutrality rulemaking, and a week after Sen. John McCain introduced a similar bill in the Senate. Blackburn framed the bill as an effort to preserve the Internet as “the last truly open public marketplace”; supporters of FCC regulation counter that the proposed nondiscrimination rule is necessary to preserve that openness.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/copyright/307/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Flash Digest: News in Brief</title>
		<link>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/copyright/flash-digest-news-in-brief-27</link>
		<comments>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/copyright/flash-digest-news-in-brief-27#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2009 00:06:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jmilkey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[District Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[First Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flash Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tyler Lacey]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/?p=287</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Tyler Lacey
Gamer Appeals Ban from Sony’s Playstation 3 Network
On September 22, 2009, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed Erik Estavillo’s lawsuit against Sony. Fox40.com reports that Estavillo was banned from Sony’s Playstation 3 Network after allegedly uttering “racial and homophobic slurs to other online gamers.” Estavillo alleged that [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By Tyler Lacey</p>
<p><strong>Gamer Appeals Ban from Sony’s Playstation 3 Network</strong></p>
<p>On September 22, 2009, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California <a href="http://www.balough.com/uploadedFiles/company%20town.pdf">dismissed</a> Erik Estavillo’s lawsuit against Sony. Fox40.com <a href="http://www.fox40.com/news/headlines/ktxl-news-playstation3-1026,0,156635.story">reports</a> that Estavillo was banned from Sony’s Playstation 3 Network after allegedly uttering “racial and homophobic slurs to other online gamers.” Estavillo alleged that his freedom of expression was abridged, and likened Sony’s network to a company town. The district court dismissed Estavillo’s First Amendment claims, stating: “Sony&#8217;s Network is not similar to a company town. The Network does not serve a substantial portion of a municipality&#8217;s functions, but rather serves solely as a forum for people to interact subject to specific contractual terms.” Estavillo recently appealed the dismissal to the Ninth Circuit and has also filed a second lawsuit against Sony.</p>
<p><strong>German Government Pledges to Protect Online Journalism in Germany with a “New Kind of Copyright”</strong></p>
<p>On October 29, 2009, the New York Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/29/business/global/29copy.html?ref=technology">reported</a> that Germany’s governing coalition “has pledged to create a new kind of copyright to protect online journalism” with the goal of “level[ing] the playing field with Internet companies like Google.” German publishers fear that Google may be “exploiting their content to build lucrative businesses without sharing the rewards.” Google aggregates news from many news outlets on its Google News website; however, Google News operates in Europe without collecting any advertising revenue. Although “[d]etails of how the proposal would work have not been spelled out,” analysts believes that the new copyright scheme may allow online journalists to “claim royalties for the use of their content by Google or other online ‘aggregators’ of news.” In support of the new scheme, counsel for the German Newspaper Publishers Association argues that there is “no fundamental right to information for free on the Internet.”</p>
<p><strong>United Kingdom to Crack Down on Online Piracy; Could Lead to Outright Disconnection of Pirates</strong></p>
<p>On October 28, 2009, the BBC <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8328820.stm">reported</a> on new legislation that will come into force in the United Kingdom in April 2010. Although “the details of it would need to be hammered out at European level,” the legislation will impose bandwidth restriction on suspected pirates. If necessary, more restrictions will be introduced in the spring of 2011 that could completely disconnect the suspected pirates from the Internet. The legislation already faces challenge from ISP TalkTalk, which has <a href="http://www.dontdisconnect.us/">created</a> a “Don’t Disconnect Us” campaign and threatened litigation. Although the legislation is designed to protect the United Kingdom’s creative content industries, legislators emphasize that the long-term solution is for “the industry to educate users and to offer new and cheaper ways to download content.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/copyright/flash-digest-news-in-brief-27/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Flash Digest: News in Brief</title>
		<link>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/patent/flash-digest-news-in-brief-26</link>
		<comments>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/patent/flash-digest-news-in-brief-26#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:30:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jmilkey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Anonymity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Communications Decency Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[District Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flash Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jyoti Uppuluri]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/?p=283</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Jyoti Uppuluri
Nokia Sues Apple for Patent Infringement Related to iPhone
On October 22, Nokia filed a suit against Apple in Delaware federal court, alleging that the iPhone infringes patents held by Nokia. The New York Times reports that the specific patents deal with the GSM and UMTS wireless standards utilized by the iPhone for voice [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By Jyoti Uppuluri</p>
<p><strong>Nokia Sues Apple for Patent Infringement Related to iPhone</strong></p>
<p>On October 22, Nokia <a href="http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/102209nokiapplecomplaint.pdf" target="_blank">filed</a> a suit against Apple in Delaware federal court, alleging that the iPhone infringes patents held by Nokia. The New York Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/23/technology/companies/23nokia.html?_r=2&amp;scp=2&amp;sq=apple&amp;st=cse">reports</a> that the specific patents deal with the GSM and UMTS wireless standards utilized by the iPhone for voice and data communication, both of which were developed in part by Nokia. The Wall Street Journal <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/10/23/whats-really-at-stake-in-the-nokiaapple-skirmish/">notes</a> that the suit might be a strategic response to the iPhone’s increasing momentum in Europe and Asia. Nokia could gain a two-percent royalty on each iPhone sold if the suit succeeds.</p>
<p><strong>Tennessee Couple Is Entitled to Unmask Anonymous Blogger</strong></p>
<p>On October 8, a Tennessee state court <a href="http://www.citmedialaw.org/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2009-10-08-Swartz%20v.%20Does%20Memorandum%20and%20Order%20on%20Motion%20to%20Quash%20and%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf" target="_blank">held</a> in <em>Swartz v. Does</em> that a couple is entitled to know the identity of the individual who posted critical statements about them in an online blog. Ars Technica <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/10/anonymous-real-estate-critic-on-the-verge-of-being-unmasked.ars">notes</a> that the blogger’s claim to protection under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act likely failed because the blog induced readers to spy on the Swartzes and report back on the blog. The <a href="http://www.citmedialaw.org/blog/2009/swartz-v-does-tennessee-court-says-couple-entitled-unmask-anonymous-blogger" target="_blank">Citizen Media Law Project</a> points out that the legal standard used by the judge in this case was “highly protective of anonymous online speech,” but that the Swartzes provided “sufficient evidence in support of their claims of wrongdoing to outweigh the anonymous blogger’s right to anonymity.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/patent/flash-digest-news-in-brief-26/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Flash Digest: News in Brief</title>
		<link>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/patent/flash-digest-news-in-brief-25</link>
		<comments>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/patent/flash-digest-news-in-brief-25#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 2009 02:09:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jmilkey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[District Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FOIA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flash Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Davis Doherty]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/?p=239</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Davis Doherty
Freedom of Speech Prevails in UK Thanks to Twitter 
On October 12, the UK-based newspaper The Guardian reported it was unable to report on a question asked of a minister during Parliamentary proceedings due to &#8220;legal obstacles, which cannot be identified.&#8221; Political bloggers and tweeters quickly responded, reporting the question was related to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By Davis Doherty</p>
<p><strong>Freedom of Speech Prevails in UK Thanks to Twitter </strong></p>
<p>On October 12, the UK-based newspaper The Guardian <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/12/guardian-gagged-from-reporting-parliament#0">reported</a> it was unable to report on a question asked of a minister during Parliamentary proceedings due to &#8220;legal obstacles, which cannot be identified.&#8221; Political bloggers and tweeters quickly responded, reporting the question was related to the oil-trading company Trafigura, which is under investigation for allegedly dumping toxic waste in the Ivory Coast. Within hours, Trafigura <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/twitter/6315133/Trafigura-tops-list-of-Twitter-trending-topics.html">rose to the top of</a> the Twitter “trending topics.” The resulting publicity led the company to relax the terms of its court-ordered gag rule. On October 13, the Guardian <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/13/trafigura-tweets-freedowm-of-speech">reported</a> the details of Trafigura&#8217;s &#8220;super-injunction,&#8221; a gag order so broad that it <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/oct/13/super-injunctions-guardian-carter-ruck">prevented</a> the newspaper from revealing the injunction&#8217;s existence.</p>
<p><strong>Copyright Treaty a Secret, Unless You&#8217;ve Got Connections </strong></p>
<p>The next round of negotiations for the multinational Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) is scheduled to run November 4 through November 6 in Korea, but the United States Trade Representative is being coy about its contents. Wired <a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/10/specialinterests-peek-at-copyrighttreaty/">reports</a> that although the language of the treaty is classified, forty-two individuals from the private sector are allowed access to its contents under a nondisclosure agreement. Their names, including both industry and public interest organization representatives, were <a href="http://keionline.org/node/660">revealed</a> after Knowledge Ecology International requested the information under the Freedom of Information Act.</p>
<p><strong>Winner of Patent Suit Against Microsoft Sues Internet Giants</strong></p>
<p>Eolas, an internet technology company that won a patent-infringement suit against Microsoft in 2003, is now taking action against the rest of the high-tech world. <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/10/company-that-won-585m-from-microsoft-sues-apple-google.ars">Ars Technica</a> and <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-10368638-264.html">CNET</a> reported on October 6 that Eolas, which holds two patents related to web browser plug-in technology, is suing twenty-three other companies for infringement in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. After withstanding Microsoft&#8217;s legal challenges to its patent in the 2003 case, Eolas is looking to repeat its success against the likes of Apple, Amazon, Google, Yahoo, and YouTube. However, a Supreme Court decision in the upcoming case <a href="http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2009/06/bilski.html">Bilski v. Doll</a> may reduce Eolas’ chances at court if software patents are weakened.</p>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="overflow: hidden; position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px;"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves /> <w:TrackFormatting /> <w:DoNotShowComments /> <w:PunctuationKerning /> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas /> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:DoNotPromoteQF /> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables /> <w:SnapToGridInCell /> <w:WrapTextWithPunct /> <w:UseAsianBreakRules /> <w:DontGrowAutofit /> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark /> <w:DontVertAlignCellWithSp /> <w:DontBreakConstrainedForcedTables /> <w:DontVertAlignInTxbx /> <w:Word11KerningPairs /> <w:CachedColBalance /> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math" /> <m:brkBin m:val="before" /> <m:brkBinSub m:val="&#45;-" /> <m:smallFrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispDef /> <m:lMargin m:val="0" /> <m:rMargin m:val="0" /> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup" /> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440" /> <m:intLim m:val="subSup" /> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr" /> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"   DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"   LatentStyleCount="267"> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"    UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading" /> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--  /* Font Definitions */  @font-face 	{font-family:"Cambria Math"; 	panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; 	mso-font-charset:0; 	mso-generic-font-family:roman; 	mso-font-pitch:variable; 	mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face 	{font-family:Calibri; 	panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; 	mso-font-charset:0; 	mso-generic-font-family:swiss; 	mso-font-pitch:variable; 	mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;}  /* Style Definitions */  p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal 	{mso-style-unhide:no; 	mso-style-qformat:yes; 	mso-style-parent:""; 	margin-top:0in; 	margin-right:0in; 	margin-bottom:10.0pt; 	margin-left:0in; 	line-height:115%; 	mso-pagination:widow-orphan; 	font-size:11.0pt; 	font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; 	mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; 	mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; 	mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; 	mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; 	mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; 	mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; 	mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; 	mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink 	{mso-style-priority:99; 	color:blue; 	text-decoration:underline; 	text-underline:single;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed 	{mso-style-noshow:yes; 	mso-style-priority:99; 	color:purple; 	mso-themecolor:followedhyperlink; 	text-decoration:underline; 	text-underline:single;} .MsoChpDefault 	{mso-style-type:export-only; 	mso-default-props:yes; 	mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; 	mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; 	mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; 	mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; 	mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; 	mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; 	mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; 	mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} .MsoPapDefault 	{mso-style-type:export-only; 	margin-bottom:10.0pt; 	line-height:115%;} @page Section1 	{size:8.5in 11.0in; 	margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; 	mso-header-margin:.5in; 	mso-footer-margin:.5in; 	mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 	{page:Section1;} --><!--[if gte mso 10]> <mce:style><!   /* Style Definitions */  table.MsoNormalTable 	{mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; 	mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; 	mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; 	mso-style-noshow:yes; 	mso-style-priority:99; 	mso-style-qformat:yes; 	mso-style-parent:""; 	mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; 	mso-para-margin-top:0in; 	mso-para-margin-right:0in; 	mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; 	mso-para-margin-left:0in; 	line-height:115%; 	mso-pagination:widow-orphan; 	font-size:11.0pt; 	font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; 	mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; 	mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; 	mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; 	mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; 	mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; 	mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} --> <!--[endif]--></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">By Davis Doherty</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Freedom of Speech Prevails in UK Thanks to Twitter </strong></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">On October 12, the UK-based newspaper The Guardian <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/12/guardian-gagged-from-reporting-parliament#0">reported</a> it was unable to report on a question asked of a minister during Parliamentary proceedings due to &#8220;legal obstacles, which cannot be identified.&#8221; Political bloggers and tweeters quickly responded, determining the question was related to the oil-trading company Trafigura, under investigation for allegedly dumping toxic waste in the Ivory Coast. Within hours, Trafigura <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/twitter/6315133/Trafigura-tops-list-of-Twitter-trending-topics.html">rose to the top of</a> the Twitter “trending topics.” The resulting publicity led the company to relax the terms of its court-ordered gag rule. On October 13, the Guardian <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/oct/13/trafigura-tweets-freedowm-of-speech">reported</a> the details of Trafigura&#8217;s &#8220;super-injunction,&#8221; a gag order so broad that it <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/oct/13/super-injunctions-guardian-carter-ruck">prevented</a> the newspaper from revealing the injunction&#8217;s existence.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Copyright Treaty a Secret, Unless You&#8217;ve Got Connections </strong></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The next round of negotiations for the multinational Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) is scheduled to run November 4 through November 6 in Korea, but the United States Trade Representative is being coy about its contents. Wired <a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/10/specialinterests-peek-at-copyrighttreaty/">reports</a> that although the language of the treaty is classified, forty-two individuals from the private sector are allowed access to its contents under a nondisclosure agreement. Their names, including both industry and public interest organization representatives, were <a href="http://keionline.org/node/660">revealed</a> after Knowledge Ecology International requested the information under the Freedom of Information Act.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Winner of Patent Suit Against Microsoft Sues Internet Giants</strong></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: &quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;">Eolas, an internet technology company that won a patent-infringement suit against Microsoft in 2003, is now taking action against the rest of the high-tech world. <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/10/company-that-won-585m-from-microsoft-sues-apple-google.ars">Ars Technica</a> and <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-10368638-264.html">CNET</a> reported on October 6 that Eolas, which holds two patents related to web browser plug-in technology, is suing twenty-three other companies for infringement in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. After withstanding Microsoft&#8217;s legal challenges to its patent in the 2003 case, Eolas is looking to repeat its success against the likes of Apple, Amazon, Google, Yahoo, and YouTube. However, a Supreme Court decision in the upcoming case <a href="http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2009/06/bilski.html">Bilski v. Doll</a> may reduce Eolas’ chances at court if software patents are weakened.</span></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/patent/flash-digest-news-in-brief-25/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Flash Digest: News in Brief</title>
		<link>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/legislation/flash-digest-news-in-brief-24</link>
		<comments>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/legislation/flash-digest-news-in-brief-24#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 19:53:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jmilkey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[7th Circuit Decisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flash Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michelle Berger]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/?p=203</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Michelle Berger
Congressional Bills: Heading Down the Series of Tubes Near You?
On October 2, The Washington Post reported that the recent proposed health care legislation has re-sparked debate over openness and online information availability in Congress.  A group of 180 members of Congress have signed a petition to require that all bills be placed online [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By Michelle Berger</p>
<p><strong>Congressional Bills: Heading Down the Series of Tubes Near You?</strong></p>
<p>On October 2, The Washington Post <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/02/AR2009100203807.html">reported</a> that the recent proposed health care legislation has re-sparked debate over openness and online information availability in Congress.  A group of 180 members of Congress have signed a petition to require that all bills be placed online for at least 72 hours before voting.  Advocates say this would allow greater government transparency and give legislators time to actually read the bills before voting.  Opponents maintain that 72 hours online won&#8217;t make the bills more accessible to citizens or legislators due to the dense legalese, and they also point out that many bills are already posted online 48 hours in advance.</p>
<p><strong>Don&#8217;t lol – Cyberbullying is No Joke in Congress</strong></p>
<p>On September 30, the House Judiciary Committee <a href="http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/hear_090930.html">heard testimony</a> concerning two bills aimed at combating cyberbullying. One bill, the Megan Meier Cyber Bullying Prevention Act, would <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.1966:">criminalize cyberbullying</a>, while the other, the Adolescent Web Awareness Requires Education (“AWARE”) Act would <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3630:">provide funding</a> to schools to teach children about cybercrime, including awareness about cyberbullying.  Ars Technica <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/10/two-cyberbullying-bills-duke-it-out-in-house-committee.ars">explains</a> that experts at the hearing expressed concerns that the language of the Megan Meier Act would create free speech concerns and be hard to police, though they generally agreed that the AWARE Act took steps in the right direction to combat cyberbullying conduct.</p>
<p><strong>No Pictures Please: Cameras Prohibited in Seventh Circuit Courtrooms</strong></p>
<p>The Wall Street Journal Blog <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/10/02/easterbrook-slams-judge-for-allowing-cameras-in-the-courtroom/">details</a> the order issued by Judge Easterbrook of the Seventh Circuit on September 28th, censuring an Illinois district court judge for allowing the filming of a trial in his courtroom.  Easterbrook explained that the allowance violated policies established by both the Judicial Conference of the United States and the Judicial Conference of the Seventh Circuit, with little elaboration.  The Illinois judge responded apologetically, explaining that he thought he could make an exception to the policies due to the public interest at issue in the case.</p>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="overflow: hidden; position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px;"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning /> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas /> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables /> <w:SnapToGridInCell /> <w:WrapTextWithPunct /> <w:UseAsianBreakRules /> <w:DontGrowAutofit /> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><span class="mceItemObject"   classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></span> <mce:style><!  st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } --> <!--[endif]--><!--  /* Font Definitions */  @font-face 	{font-family:"DejaVu Sans"; 	mso-font-charset:0; 	mso-generic-font-family:auto; 	mso-font-pitch:variable; 	mso-font-signature:0 0 0 0 0 0;}  /* Style Definitions */  p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal 	{mso-style-parent:""; 	margin:0in; 	margin-bottom:.0001pt; 	mso-pagination:none; 	mso-hyphenate:none; 	font-size:12.0pt; 	font-family:"Times New Roman"; 	mso-fareast-font-family:"DejaVu Sans"; 	mso-font-kerning:.5pt; 	mso-fareast-language:#00FF;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink 	{mso-style-parent:""; 	color:navy; 	text-decoration:underline; 	text-underline:single;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed 	{color:purple; 	text-decoration:underline; 	text-underline:single;} @page Section1 	{size:8.5in 11.0in; 	margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; 	mso-header-margin:.5in; 	mso-footer-margin:.5in; 	mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 	{page:Section1;} --><!--[if gte mso 10]> <mce:style><!   /* Style Definitions */  table.MsoNormalTable 	{mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; 	mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; 	mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; 	mso-style-noshow:yes; 	mso-style-parent:""; 	mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; 	mso-para-margin:0in; 	mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; 	mso-pagination:widow-orphan; 	font-size:10.0pt; 	font-family:"Times New Roman"; 	mso-ansi-language:#0400; 	mso-fareast-language:#0400; 	mso-bidi-language:#0400;} --> <!--[endif]--></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">By Michelle Berger</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong> </strong></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Congressional Bills: Heading Down the Series of Tubes Near You?</strong></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">
<p class="MsoNormal">The Washington Post <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/02/AR2009100203807.html">reports</a> that the recent proposed health care legislation has re-sparked debate over openness and online information availability in Congress.<span> </span>A group of 180 members of Congress have signed a petition to require that all bills be placed online for at least 72 hours before voting.<span> </span>Advocates say this would allow greater government transparency and give legislators time to actually read the bills before voting.<span> </span>Opponents maintain that 72 hours online won&#8217;t make the bills more accessible to citizens or legislators due to the dense legalese, and they also point out that many bills are already posted online 48 hours in advance.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Don&#8217;t lol – Cyberbullying is No Joke in Congress</strong></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong> </strong></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">On September 30, the House Judiciary Committee <a href="http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/hear_090930.html">heard testimony</a> concerning two bills aimed at combating cyberbullying. One bill, the Megan Meier Cyber Bullying Prevention Act, would <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.1966:">criminalize cyberbullying</a>, while the other, the Adolescent Web Awareness Requires Education (“AWARE”) Act would <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3630:">provide funding</a> to schools to teach children about cybercrime, including awareness about cyberbullying.<span> </span>Ars Technica <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/10/two-cyberbullying-bills-duke-it-out-in-house-committee.ars">explains</a> that experts at the hearing expressed concerns that the language of the Megan Meier Act would create free speech concerns and be hard to police, though they generally agreed that the AWARE Act took steps in the right direction to combat cyberbullying conduct.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong>No Pictures Please: Cameras Prohibited in Seventh Circuit Courtrooms</strong></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">The Wall Street Journal Blog <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/10/02/easterbrook-slams-judge-for-allowing-cameras-in-the-courtroom/">details</a> the order issued by Judge Easterbrook of the Seventh Circuit on September 28th, censuring an Illinois district court judge for allowing the filming of a trial in his courtroom.<span> </span>Easterbrook explained that the allowance violated policies established by both the Judicial Conference of the United States and the Judicial Conference of the Seventh Circuit, with little elaboration.<span> </span>The Illinois judge responded apologetically, explaining that he thought he could make an exception to the policies due to the public interest at issue in the case.</span></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/legislation/flash-digest-news-in-brief-24/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Flash Digest: News in Brief</title>
		<link>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/international-decisions/flash-digest-news-in-brief-23</link>
		<comments>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/international-decisions/flash-digest-news-in-brief-23#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 03:37:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jmilkey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Agency Rulemaking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Communications Commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flash Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Decisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trademark]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sharona Hakimi]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/?p=188</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Sharona Hakimi
EU Court Advisor Supports Google Keyword Searches in Trademark Suit
On September 22, Reuters reported that an advocate general to the European Court of Justice, the EU’s highest court, stated that Google did not infringe trademark rights of luxury goods maker Louis Vuitton (LVMH). Google sells keywords that use the company’s trademarks, but Advocate [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By Sharona Hakimi</p>
<p><strong>EU Court Advisor Supports Google Keyword Searches in Trademark Suit</strong></p>
<p>On September 22, Reuters <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/ousivMolt/idUSTRE58L13C20090922">reported</a> that an advocate general to the European Court of Justice, the EU’s highest court, stated that Google did not infringe trademark rights of luxury goods maker Louis Vuitton (LVMH). Google sells keywords that use the company’s trademarks, but Advocate General Poiares Maduro concluded that trademark protections do not extend to search advertising keywords because they are not considered a product sold to the public. ZDNet’s Richard Koman <a href="http://government.zdnet.com/?p=5469">argues</a> that this decision does not account for brand confusion arising from keyword searches, and demonstrates the court’s “misunderstanding of the Web as something tangential to ‘real’ commerce.” Although the Luxembourg-based court follows the opinions of its advocates general in most cases, the judges will give their final judgment at a later date.</p>
<p><strong>Facebook Shuts Down Beacon Ad Software as Part of Lawsuit Settlement</strong></p>
<p>Ars Technica <a href="http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2009/09/facebook-beacon-shines-for-last-time-as-part-of-settlement.ars">reports</a> that on September 18, Facebook announced it will shut down its controversial Beacon ad software as part of a settlement for a class-action privacy suit. The Beacon software, launched in November 2007, allowed off-Facebook activities to be published in users’ news feeds without their explicit consent. After over a year of legal disputes regarding the software, Facebook decided to settle with complaining users, agreeing to discontinue Beacon and offering $9.5 million to create a foundation that would “fund projects and initiatives that promote the cause of online privacy, safety, and security.” Facebook’s director of policy communications said that the company has “learned a great deal from the experience.” The settlement proposal still awaits a district court judge’s approval.</p>
<p><strong>FCC Proposes Net Neutrality Rules for Internet Service Providers</strong></p>
<p>The New York Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/22/technology/internet/22net.html?_r=1&amp;nl=technology&amp;emc=techupdateema1">reports</a> that on September 12, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission proposed new regulations regarding net neutrality for Internet service providers. The proposal would bar providers from blocking or slowing Internet traffic on the basis of content. Consumer advocates of the policy say networks should not be able to deter users from accessing lawful Internet content or applications by restricting bandwidth. Wired’s Dylan Tweeny <a href="http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/09/fcc-neutrality-mistake/">warns</a> that the proposed rules may be difficult to enforce, stifle overall service due to capacity limitations, and decrease innovation in a market that has flourished without government intervention. The rules will formally be proposed in an open FCC meeting in October.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/international-decisions/flash-digest-news-in-brief-23/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Flash Digest: News in Brief</title>
		<link>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/copyright/flash-digest-news-in-brief-22</link>
		<comments>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/copyright/flash-digest-news-in-brief-22#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2009 00:57:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jmilkey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Digital Millennium Copyright Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[District Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flash Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Andrew Jacobs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/?p=184</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Andrew Jacobs
ISPs Found Liable for Websites&#8217; Trademark and Copyright Infringement
Computerworld and Ars Technica report that on August 28, a federal jury handed down a $32.4 million judgment against two ISPs that hosted websites selling counterfeit Louis Vuitton products. Louis Vuitton successfully argued on a theory of contributory infringement, overcoming the ISPs&#8217; claims of immunity [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By Andrew Jacobs</p>
<p><strong>ISPs Found Liable for Websites&#8217; Trademark and Copyright Infringement</strong><a href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9137385/Web_hosters_ordered_to_pay_32M_for_contributing_to_trademark_infringement"></a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9137385/Web_hosters_ordered_to_pay_32M_for_contributing_to_trademark_infringement">Computerworld</a> and <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/09/32m-louis-vuitton-judgment-shows-limits-of-isp-safe-harbors.ars">Ars Technica</a> report that on August 28, a federal jury handed down a $32.4 million judgment against two ISPs that hosted websites selling counterfeit Louis Vuitton products. Louis Vuitton successfully argued on a theory of contributory infringement, overcoming the ISPs&#8217; claims of immunity under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act&#8217;s &#8220;safe harbor&#8221; provisions. Evidence that the ISPs had received and failed to respond to notices of the illegal activity from Louis Vuitton was key to the case.</p>
<p><strong>EU to Investigate Oracle/Sun Deal</strong></p>
<p>On September 3, the European Union&#8217;s antitrust regulators announced plans for a formal investigation of Oracle&#8217;s planned buyout of Sun Microsystems, The Washington Post <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/03/AR2009090300703.html">reports</a>. The investigation will center on the competitive consequences of &#8220;the world&#8217;s biggest proprietary database company . . . tak[ing] over the world&#8217;s leading open-source database company.&#8221; The European Commission will come to a ruling on the deal by January 19; the U.S. Department of Justice has already approved it.</p>
<p><strong>Authors Voice Privacy Concerns in Objection to Google Settlement</strong></p>
<p>A group of authors and publishers filed an objection to the proposed settlement between The Authors&#8217; Guild and Google Book Search (GBS), the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) <a href="http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2009/09/08">reported</a> on September 8. A fairness hearing regarding the settlement is set for next month. In the objection, prepared by EFF, the ACLU, and the Samuelson Clinic at UC Berkeley School of Law, the authors assert that GBS&#8217;s collection of personally identifiable information regarding users&#8217; habits will having a chilling effect on readership. Limited information retention and strict disclosure standards are among the authors&#8217; specific demands.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/copyright/flash-digest-news-in-brief-22/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Flash Digest: News in Brief</title>
		<link>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/9th-circuit/flash-digest-news-in-brief-21</link>
		<comments>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/9th-circuit/flash-digest-news-in-brief-21#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2009 20:29:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jmilkey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[9th Circuit Decisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Agency Rulemaking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Communications Commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flash Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telecommunications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trademark]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ian B. Brooks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ian Brooks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/?p=180</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ 
By Ian B. Brooks
Paris Hilton Obtains Small Victory in Ninth Circuit
WSJ Blogs reports that the Ninth Circuit gave Paris Hilton the green light on August 31 to proceed in her lawsuit against Hallmark for its use of her image and the phrase &#8220;That&#8217;s Hot&#8221; in a birthday greeting card. The court made note of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> Normal   0                  false   false   false      EN-US   X-NONE   X-NONE </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> </xml><![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 10]><br />
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<p> <![endif]--><br />
By Ian B. Brooks</p>
<p><strong>Paris Hilton Obtains Small Victory in Ninth Circuit</strong></p>
<p>WSJ Blogs <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/08/31/thats-hot-paris-hilton-wins-hallmark-decision-at-ninth-circuit/">reports</a> that the Ninth Circuit gave Paris Hilton the <a href="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/08/31/08-55443.pdf">green light</a> on August 31 to proceed in her lawsuit against Hallmark for its use of her image and the phrase &#8220;That&#8217;s Hot&#8221; in a birthday greeting card. The court made note of the similarities between the card and Hilton&#8217;s appearance on the television show &#8220;The Simple Life.&#8221; In support of Hilton, the court stated that she &#8220;has at least some probability of prevailing on the merits before a trier of fact.&#8221; The case name is <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Hilton v. Hallmark Cards</span>.</p>
<p><strong>Cable Companies No Longer Capped at 30% Market Share</strong></p>
<p>The Washington Post <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/28/AR2009082803271.html">reports</a> that on August 28, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Comcast v. FCC</span> <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/19197046/Appeals-Opinion-in-Comcast-v-FCC">invalidated</a> an FCC rule that capped the market share of cable companies at 30%. The FCC supported the rule because it believed that cable companies with market share larger than 30% would harm consumers. The court rejected the FCC&#8217;s rule in part because it failed to show how consumers would be harmed by the large cable companies in the current market, given the competition between cable, satellite, and fiber optic providers.</p>
<p><strong>Texas Links DNA to Criminal Records</strong></p>
<p>WSJ Blogs <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/08/31/texas-law-to-breathe-new-life-into-old-dna/">reports</a> that on September 1, a new law took effect in Texas will link DNA evidence to sexual assault suspects&#8217; criminal records. The link will be maintained regardless of whether the statute of limitations has passed or the suspect has been tried. The law&#8217;s supporters want to ensure harsher penalties to these suspects should they face legal troubles in the future, as the record would be available to parole boards and prosecutors. Critics of the law, including the ACLU, fear the potential abuse of due process rights.</p>
<p><strong>Florida Bar Wants Access to Certain Applicant Facebook Profiles</strong></p>
<p>The Florida Board of Bar Examiners will now be <a href="http://www.floridabar.org/DIVCOM/JN/JNNews01.nsf/8c9f13012b96736985256aa900624829/d288355844fc8c728525761900652232?OpenDocument">requesting access</a> to the Facebook profiles of certain applicants on a case-by-case basis. The Board has identified a number of categories of applicants that it will require access from, including persons with a history of certain types of legal experience or substance abuse. The Citizen Media Law Project <a href="http://www.citmedialaw.org/blog/2009/florida-nukes-fridge-facebook-bar-and-latest-entry-social-network-hijacking-saga">notes</a> many of the privacy concerns related to the Bar&#8217;s decision.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/9th-circuit/flash-digest-news-in-brief-21/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Flash Digest: News in Brief</title>
		<link>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/software/flash-digest-news-in-brief-20</link>
		<comments>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/software/flash-digest-news-in-brief-20#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 01:38:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jmilkey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[District Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Circuit Decisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flash Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hacking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Software]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telecommunications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Evan Kubota]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/?p=176</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Evan Kubota
Microsoft, Yahoo, Amazon Join Opposition to Google Settlement
The New York Times reports that Microsoft, Yahoo, and Amazon have joined library associations, nonprofits, and individuals in opposing the Google Books settlement in The Authors Guild v. Google. The settlement, which would allow Google to provide digital versions of millions of books, still requires court [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By Evan Kubota</p>
<p><strong>Microsoft, Yahoo, Amazon Join Opposition to Google Settlement</strong></p>
<p>The New York Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/21/technology/internet/21google.html?hpw">reports</a> that Microsoft, Yahoo, and Amazon have joined library associations, nonprofits, and individuals in opposing the Google Books settlement in The Authors Guild v. Google. The settlement, which would allow Google to provide digital versions of millions of books, still requires court approval and remains the subject of a Department of Justice antitrust investigation. The opposition group, tentatively called the Open Book Alliance, will argue to the Department of Justice that the settlement agreement is anticompetitive.</p>
<p><strong>Internet Law Group Brings Suit Against Unidentified Hackers</strong></p>
<p>&#8220;John Doe&#8221; suits brought against unidentified Eastern European hackers may offer a glimpse of the hackers&#8217; targets and techniques through subpoenas against defrauded banks. However, the banks may challenge the subpoenas in order to protect customer privacy. Unspam Technologies, a group that recently filed suit against bank hackers in the Eastern District of Virginia, hopes to improve bank security and potentially identify the hackers. The New York Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/20/technology/20hacker.html?em">outlines</a> the stakes and key players in the case, <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Project Honey Pot v. Does</span>.</p>
<p><strong>Mozilla Versus Microsoft in EU Browser Investigation</strong></p>
<p>Ryan Paul at Ars Technica <a href="http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/08/mozilla-responds-to-microsofts-eu-browser-ballot-proposal.ars">criticizes</a> Mozilla&#8217;s complaints regarding Microsoft&#8217;s Internet Explorer bundling and default-setting practices. Paul not only argues that many of Mozilla&#8217;s complaints &#8220;lack substance,&#8221; but also claims that the European Union has no business intervening to encourage competition because Mozilla&#8217;s Firefox browser has a 22 percent market share &#8220;amidst an increasingly competitive browser market.&#8221; In contrast, Mitchell Baker of Mozilla <a href="http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2009/08/17/proposed-microsoft-ec-settlement/">argues</a> that the Firefox browser is at a disadvantage because Internet Explorer has a &#8220;uniquely privileged position on Windows installations.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/software/flash-digest-news-in-brief-20/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
