[conspire] Copyrights and patents

Ruben Safir ruben at mrbrklyn.com
Mon Mar 28 19:29:40 PDT 2011

On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 07:09:43PM -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Ruben Safir (ruben at mrbrklyn.com):
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/29/business/media/29ipad.html
> > 
> > FWIW - this is an example of a company, TM in this case, stretching the
> > law to create facts on the ground....
> Stretching which law, by the way?
> The article you point to discussed cable channels such as Comedy
> Central, which is owned by Viacom, one of the two cable-TV holding
> companies it discusses.  Viacom asserts that Comedy Central is made
> available to the cable companies by contract, and that the rights
> conveyed by contract don't include streaming to tablet computers.
> That strikes me as entirely plausible.
> Are you saying some law requires that right to be automatically conveyed
> to contract partners?  If so, what law?

No - every hearing on copyright in Washington includes extensive
discussion on the rights of internet respoduction, and the TV stations
themselves sued to prevent the broadcasts from being streamed from
Canada.  TM knows full well that they can no legally stream their
broacasting rights to the net without violating copyright, whether on an
ipad or not.  In fact, they are a leading arguer for this restriction.

So their ipad or android ap is them ***knowingly*** abusing the copyright of
that content, just like the radio broadcasters did when they played

TW just woke up and decided to create facts on the ground and now is
making a public campaign to try to gain a foothold.

We'll see how this plays out because until now those ****content copyght holders***
have until now virtually refused to allow internet streaming.

Now, this all being said, the fact is that its not such an open and
closed case that streaming is illegal.  But it is as far as TW and other
content holders are, but their Cable TV division seems to not have
gotten that memo (har har).  Either that or the Cable companies have
begun to figure out that traditional Cable TV has as little future as
POTS does.


> Less vague, please.  (I've noticed that rant percentage takes a
> nosedive when speakers are politely challenged on doubtful assertions of
> fact.)
> > and THEN following up with a PR campaign to change public perception
> > (not to mention their inevitable lobbying).
> The cited article doesn't mention lobbying.  It does mention that
> Time Warner Cable had been doing a PR campaign on its Web site.  Is
> there some other article that talks about lobbying in connection with
> this story?
> I'm not clear on any broader significance to this money squabbling
> between cable companies and channel owners.  In particular, it seems to
> have nothing particularly to do with copyrights or patents (see Subject 
> header).
> _______________________________________________
> conspire mailing list
> conspire at linuxmafia.com
> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/conspire

http://www.mrbrklyn.com - Interesting Stuff
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software

So many immigrant groups have swept through our town that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological proportions in the mind of the world  - RI Safir 1998

http://fairuse.nylxs.com  DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002

"Yeah - I write Free Software...so SUE ME"

"The tremendous problem we face is that we are becoming sharecroppers to our own cultural heritage -- we need the ability to participate in our own society."

"> I'm an engineer. I choose the best tool for the job, politics be damned.<
You must be a stupid engineer then, because politcs and technology have been attached at the hip since the 1st dynasty in Ancient Egypt.  I guess you missed that one."

© Copyright for the Digital Millennium

More information about the conspire mailing list