Entries from October 1, 2003 - October 31, 2003

Friday
Oct312003

Today's New Blawg

Rod Dixon writes Open Source Software Law [via Ernie Svenson]:



I am a lawyer. I also teach and write about the intersection of law and technology, particularly in the context of the social, cultural, and political dimensions of computer-mediated communications. I hope you might consider using my book [link added, out in December], if you participate in the open source community.



A recent post attempts to clarify whether an open source software license is a contract. (It depends.) For more great discussion of these kinds of issues, in downloadable MP3 format no less, OSCOM (the Open Source Content Management conference last May in Cambridge) had an excellent intellectual property panel moderated by John Palfrey and featuring Aaron Swartz, Mike Olson, Larry Rosen, and Liza Vertinsky* (MP3), and the EFF's Wendy Seltzer gave a presentation on the Berkman Center's Openlaw project (MP3).

*Check out Liza's law firm's awesome Web site.

Thursday
Oct302003

WLF Legal Backgrounder on Intel v. Hamidi

The Washington Legal Foundation this week has published an article I wrote about the California Supreme Court's decision in Intel v. Hamidi (PDF): "California High Court Complicates Control Of Unwanted E-Mails." This case was a fun one to blog along with as it worked its way through the California courts, particularly when Ken Hamidi's lawyer Greg Lastowka dropped by after winning and confessed to being an avid Bag and Baggage lurker.

Thursday
Oct302003

Harnessing Influence

Howard Bashman announces that his 20 Questions For The Appellate Judge interview series has had several recent exciting sign-ups, and is booked through March of next year. The February slot will feature Ninth Circuit Judge Stephen R. Reinhardt—the first, but hopefully not the last, participant from the jurists included among California's 100 most influential lawyers, as recognized by the Daily Journal.

Thursday
Oct302003

Better

Stacy Cowley of IDG News, today at ITworld.com:



Without taking a position on whether SCC's chips illegally incorporate Lexmark code, the Copyright Office ruled that the DMCA does not block software developers from using reverse engineering to circumvent digital protection of copyright material if they do so to achieve interoperability with an independently created computer program.


[ ] SCC had asked the Copyright Office to recommend several DMCA exemptions that would protect its efforts to defeat Lexmark's protection technology. Those requested exemptions are unnecessary because existing DMCA statutes already allow the kind of reverse engineering that SCC could have used to thwart Lexmark's protections, the agency said in a lengthy memo of recommendations about exemptions to the DMCA.

(Emphasis added, and indicates that unlike many of her colleagues Ms. Cowley probably did read the Rulemaking and Register's Recommendation.) I have been surprised and disappointed by the sheer volume of bad reporting on that portion of the Rulemaking that touched on Static Control's rejected exemption request and the Lexmark v. Static Control dispute. Even my favorite television program got taken in, and simply parroted (and drew unsupportable conclusions from) one of the worst early stories that appeared.

Thursday
Oct302003

Today's New Blawg

Ok, deep breath, "this-is-the-blawg-that-JackBruce-built" litany to follow.

Institutional Shareholder Services, Inc. (ISS) provides proxy voting and corporate governance services to publicly traded companies. Securities Class Action Services (SCAS) is the part of ISS that "track[s] class action suits, state and SEC settlements and file[s] claims that entitle clients to share in settlement awards." Bruce Carton is Executive Director of SCAS, a former Piper Rudnick securities litigator, and former Senior Counsel to the SEC's U.S. enforcement division.

Still with me? Bruce writes Securities Litigation Watch, a blawg full of news and resources relating to securities lawsuits—for instance, advice for traders from one who's been there about how to get the SEC's Division of Enforcement all over you like a bad suit. Very specialized and knowledgeable, good securities law resource. [Via Blawg.org]