|
Saturday, May 27, 2006
Court makes cider of Apple's case 
| | The biggest, as Eugene Volokh explains nicely, is that bloggers are journalists, and entitled to the privileges enjoyed by journalists under California law. Eugene concludes, |
| | It seems to me that the court got this absolutely right. Under the California journalist's privilege, all those who communicate to the public in a relatively regular way (as opposed to speaking only occasionally, or speaking only to a few friends) are protected, and are covered by the language "newspapers, magazines, or other periodical publications." Some state statutes are narrower, applying, for instance, only to "newspapers." But the California provision is written broadly, and should be read broadly, without any textually unjustified, hard-to-administer, or illogical distinctions. |
| | Congratulations to O'Grady's legal team, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation and (representing amici) the Center for Internet & Society, for their success in this case. I was one of the amici (bloggers and others) on whose behalf the Center filed its brief. |
| | Great line, via Denise, from Joe Gratz: California: Our Appellate Clerks Are Even Geekier Than Our Tech-Rumor Bloggers. |
| | Someday there will be a company that not only has inspiring advertisments and products, but will actually have a philosophy that is consistent, that returns the generosity it received by feeding and nurturing the environment in which it exists. A consistent Apple, with integrity, would stand up for free speech on the Internet, not try to destroy it. Ask not what the Internet can do for you, ask what you can do for the Internet. |
| | In a related matter (in a what-you-can-do-for-the-Internet way), Cory Doctorow rises above the widespread piling on O'Reilly for what was clearly a dumb mistake. Cory has a brilliant legal mind, and can often bring necessary clarity to a complex situation. He does that here: |
| | The O'Reilly Conferences' unique selling proposition is that they rewrite the rules of the industry and coalesce meaning out of the stew of ideas floating around the field. If you're going to name the next direction the world will take, you have to be prepared for the world to take that direction. Industry shifts become public property -- or rather, things that are privately controlled can't shift a diverse industry. |
| | That means that O'Reilly needs to choose whether it's going to retain control the word "Web 2.0" for conferences, or retain control over the shifts that created the Web 2.0 phenomenon. |
| | Or take a third path: let it go. |
| | When you commit arson for a living, don't complain when your fire gets out of control. Take advantage of what you started, but in new ways that work in the world you changed. |
Sliding
Copyright 2009 The Doc Searls Weblog
|
