----- Forwarded message from Dave Farber <[email protected]> ----- Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 21:12:29 -0400 From: Dave Farber <[email protected]> Subject: [IP] Dueling editorials on Viacom v Google (Copyright Cartel v the Internet) Reply-To: [email protected] To: ip <[email protected]>
Begin forwarded message: > From: Dan Gillmor <[email protected]> > Date: June 30, 2010 9:07:12 PM EDT > To: Dave Farber <[email protected]> > Subject: Dueling editorials on Viacom v Google (Copyright Cartel v the > Internet) > > The Los Angeles Times has a smart editorial, clearly written by someone who > understands technology and copyright, about the Viacom-Google decision: > > http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-youtube-20100629,0,2290414.story > > But the San Francisco Chronicle has an editorial that's laughably flabby, > clearly written by someone who knows a bit about copyright and technology and > is ardently trying to turn back the clock: > > http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/06/27/EDF11E4FUV.DTL > > My take (at Salon): > > http://www.salon.com/technology/dan_gillmor/2010/06/24/viacom_loses_free_speech_wins > > ------------------------------------------- Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ----- End forwarded message -----
