Now that I’ve offered some explanation for my tardiness, on to my interview with Chris. Chris was a great guest, focusing on what we can learn from the free software movement beyond its mere revolutionary use in the technology context. Chris’ writing on this topic is startling for its breadth, and we were able to extend its application well beyond the technological sector. I was thrilled to have Chris on the show and hope that you enjoy the interview!

Show #100, October 28 is my interview with William Patry, Esq., Senior Copyright Counsel at Google, author of Moral Panics and the Copyright Wars. Bill has written a thorough and descriptive overview of the state of the battle over the contours of copyright. In the interview, we discuss his personal interactions with Jack Valenti, as well as his critique of the nature of language in the efforts to frame the issues from all sides. While we do not discuss the status of the book search settlement negotiations, we cover plenty of fertile ground and I greatly enjoyed his insights and our discussion (hopefully Bill will come back on after the settlement is complete!)

Show #101, November 4 is my interview with repeat guest Larry Downes, author of The Laws of Disruption. Larry’s book, written for a broad audience, shows how technology has outpaced law in a variety of areas. We discuss a wide range of topics in furtherance of understanding how we might react to various changes in technology and society. Larry’s book is eminently readable and I greatly enjoyed the show and discussion!

On February 4, Show # 84, I interviewed Robert Wallace, co-author of Spycraft. Spycraft is a history of the CIA’s Office of Technical Services, and is a fascinating account of the use of technology by the CIA and other intelligence agencies. I hope that you enjoy our discussion.

*Unfortunately, the audio quality of shows 83 and 84 is poor — you need to turn up your volume to maximum to make the discussion intelligible. Rather than re-record the interview, I post them here, and apologize to my guests and listeners for the technical difficulties.*

Show #85, February 18, is my interview with Prof. Ned Snow of the University of Arkansas School of Law on the perils of copyright. We discussed Ned’s insightful article Copytraps, a study of the impact of current copyright law on the unwitting copyright violator. Ned’s work is of universal interest, and I hope that you enjoy our discussion!

The first, Show #76, is my interview with Prof. Paul Ohm of the University of Colorado Law School. We discussed his most recent article, The Rise and Fall of Invasive ISP [Internet Service Provider] Surveillance. It is a fascinating article that discusses, in greal detail, Paul’s core argument that consumers and citizens should be extremely concerned about how ISPs can and do monitor the Internet activities of their subscribers. We discuss not only the whys but the hows of ISP surveillance and Paul’s suggestions to address these issues. I very much enjoyed the interview.

Show #77 is my interview with David Rice, author of Geekonomics: The Real Cost of Insecure Software. David’s book focuses on the concerns surrounding insecure and/or flawed software to our nation’s (and the world’s) economy and infrastructure. This is a serious issue that we need to address as a nation — and a great start would be to take notice of these issues as a populace through David’s book. I greatly enjoyed the interview!

Finally, Show # 78 is my interview with Michael Gollin, Esq. of Venable LLP, author of Driving Innovation. Michael’s book is a comprehensive overview of the application of intellectual property law (IP) to the business plan and management of businesses. In our interview, we largely focus on an often-ignored aspect of IP management: the human factor. Michael’s book would be a great desk reference for those in any aspect of IP management. I hope that you enjoy the interview as much as I did!

Ah, the irony, given Rowling’s suit against RDR Books regarding “HP Lexicon, a Harry Potter reference guide that has existed on the web for a long time, and has become the authoritative guide to the people, places and things of the Harry Potter universe.” For those that are not familiar, according to Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society, “upon learning that RDR Books planned to publish a printed version of the Lexicon, Rowling and Warner Brothers filed suit, alleging copyright and trademark infringement, and seeking to permanently enjoin the publication of the HP Lexicon in printed form.”

I love fair use irony.

[Disclaimer (for those unfamiliar): CIS represents the defendant and I'm affiliated with CIS as a non-resident fellow.]

Well, I’m here to provide, thanks to some wonderful authors. I am thrilled to post four new shows today.

The first is Show #64, my interview with Dan (Danny) Breznitz, Assistant Professor at the Sam Nunn School of International Affairs and the School of Public Policy at Georgia Institute of Technology, author of Innovation and the State. Dan’s book recently won the Don K. Price Award awarded by the American Political Science Association for the Best Book on Science and Technology, and focuses on the innovation policies of three growing economies: Israel, Ireland and Taiwan. In the interview, we discuss, among other topics, the policies of these three nations, the politics involved and how innovation policy can and is developed in growing and emerging economies. I greatly enjoyed the interview and Dan’s book.

Show #65 is my interview with Alex Wright, author of Glut: Mastering Information Through the Ages. Alex’s book traces the history of information science and weaves together a lot of information (appropriately) to create a narrative showing the growth of libraries, access to information and how information is organized. Alex’s book is eminently readable and the interview went very well!

Show #66 is my interview with Matt Mason, author of The Pirate’s Dilemma. Matt’s book focuses on the role of the (intellectual property and commercial) pirate in digital society. From discussion of Sealand’s pirate radio to the ethics of piracy, Matt’s book takes an untraditional look at an untraditional trade. A fun read and interview!

Finally, Show #67 is my interview with Prof. Jonathan Zittrain of Harvard Law School, author of The Future of the Internet — And How to Stop It. Jonathan’s book, which has gotten quite a bit of media attention already, examines technology policy as it exists today and makes various policy prescriptions for how to develop and/or maintain an Internet that respects the often divergent interests of the many entities involved in its creation and operation. Jonathan is one of the leading thinkers on technology policy and I greatly enjoyed the interview!

Through the rest of June, KZSU’s interim period, Hearsay Culture will be on hiatus. But I’m busy booking the next quarter’s guests and recording interviews, and as always, welcome your suggestions. Thanks again for listening and spreading the word (which, I might add, is my primary and only official mode of promotion of the show).

(1) Invades privacy through surveillance and tracking of online behavior.
(2) Inhibits free speech and other rights because it is inevitably over-inclusive.
(3) Leads to increased demands for technology-based policing (broader filtering of trademark, trade secrets, hate speech and slander, and device-level filtering).
(4) Ineffective (or worse) as can be defeated through encryption, leads to “darknets” and difficult for legitimate law enforcement efforts.
(5) Inconsistent with existing laws like DMCA, EU E-commerce Directive, Wiretap Act, ECPA, privacy and copyright laws.
(6) Costs without benefits, given implementation costs that will be passed on to consumers.
(7) Liability risk through claims from consumers if over-inclusive and content owners if under-inclusive.
(8) Stifles innovation by inhibiting new technologies and services (place shifting, network storage).

This is a fascinating debate that naturally pits the content industry against some, but not all, ISPs, as well as privacy advocates and many proponents of the commons.

The last point made by Biddle is particularly interesting, as it raises the specter that filtering becomes a mechanism by which place shifting (i.e, watching television through the Internet) — as compared to time shifting (i.e., watching television at a different time slot than when originally aired) — and other innovative technologies become threatened. Betamax, the subject of Sony v. Universal (colloquially known as the “Betamax case”), did not survive, although there were many reasons for its demise. Does copyright filtering represent a leading-edge extension of that concern?

John has written a wonderful book, The Access Principle, making the case for open and free access to scholarship. As I mention on the show, I do not regard this as terribly controversial, but I’m biased. John addresses the arguments that may be raised against such a goal and makes a strong case for its immediate implementation.

Brett is a prolific scholar (and, I should mention, generous with his time when new professors — like me — ask for advice), and writes in two areas in which I have a strong interest: commons and infrastructure. In this interview, we discuss the former through the lens of Brett’s view of what we need to expand the public’s knowledge of the importance of the commons, as well as through discussion of Yochai Benkler’s The Wealth of Networks.

I enjoyed both interviews, which are certainly related in both guest’s embrace of public and open dissemination of knowledge (among, I imagine, other similarities), and hope that you enjoy both shows!

I also have fond memories of leafing through LPs and CDs that would come in from various artists. One such CD that came in during my senior year was Indio’s Big Harvest, including the single “Hard Sun.” If you’ve heard of Indio today, it may be because “Hard Sun” was redone by Eddie Vedder for the movie Into the Wild. Gordon Peterson, the man behind Indio, for reasons unclear and largely irrelevant to this post recorded this one album and has since apparently been out of the public spotlight. Big Harvest is a terrific album, full of excellent and insightful lyrics and tight musicianship. Reminiscent of Peter Gabriel and Sting, it remains one of my favorite albums of the 1980s. Indeed, “Hard Sun” actually turned me on to environmentalism, never a major focus of my attention but certainly on my radar screen afterwards.

Indio got little play on WOSS-FM (and not because I “borrowed” the copy for my “personal use,” thank you very much). So go out and buy it? Not easy. It’s out-of-print, although you can find copies for less than $100, usually, and sometimes much less if you find an auction at the right time.

My concern here is not for anyone with means to procure a second-hand copy by paying the premium due to its out-of-print status. And I’ll spare you a rant about labels, assuming that the label is even the reason for its unavailability (although presumably the lack of a perceived market for the CD has something to do with it). Rather, my concern is for the person without such means, who may wish to enjoy, grow from or be influenced by this album.

I am not going to recreate the various arguments made for and against piracy (that is, the illegal download) in such circumstances. But it is worth reminding ourselves that even in a day of rapid increases in the ability to share information, there remains information that is difficult to acquire. And if the larger public goal of information technology is to allow for greater and easier sharing of information, then even the comparatively trivial situation of the affordable availability of a valuable CD should be considered. This is not piracy on the scale necessary to allow for culture to spread into closed societies (as written about eloquently by former guest Balasz Bodo), but in order to address the question of the role of intellectual property law in preventing easy access to information (regardless of the information’s commercial value), one should consider the beleaguered music fan searching in vain for a clean and new copy of Big Harvest. Hmmm, a lot has been written in this area, but maybe that’s something to focus on more closely . . .

For those concerned about the challenges facing those seeking to invoke First Amendment protections in the general IP scheme, you’ll find much to bring you joy and hope in reading this decision (found attached to the above blog posts). Happy reading, and congrats to the plaintiffs, Larry, Chris and everyone who worked on the case!