August 2001

The Very Real Threat of the D.M.C.A.

If you have any doubts about the chilling effect of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act on free speech, take a gander at this article from Salon. A British medical research firm has used the Act to force a U.S. ISP to remove the page of animal rights group critical of their work:

On Thursday, EnviroLink Network, a Pittsburgh-based nonprofit Internet service provider, took offline two Web sites belonging to the animal-rights activist group Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty. The action came in response to a letter sent to the ISP earlier in the week by Huntingdon Life Sciences, a British medical research firm. Citing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), Huntingdon accused the activists of violating its copyright. Although no charges have yet been filed, under the terms of the DMCA, Envirolink was forced to remove the sites to avoid potential legal liability. \”It\’s very clear that Huntingdon Life Sciences just wants to shut them up,\” says Josh Knauer, the founder of Envirolink, which provides free Web hosting to nonprofits . . .

More. This is a truly disgusting development.

U.S. Copyright Office: No Substantial Changes to D.M.C.A.

After a review of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the U.S. has concluded that offline copyright law does not apply to the digital world, and that the anti-circumvention clause does not merit further attention:

The study does give critics some ammunition to work with. It asks legislators, for example, to clarify whether temporary copies are legal, and advises Congress to give users of digital content the right to make archival copies. But the report also rejects the argument that offline copyright law should apply to the digital world, calling the analogy \”flawed and unconvincing.\”

The study also refuses to address the energetic public outcry over the DMCA\’s controversial anti-circumvention clause, which prohibits the creation and distribution of methods for getting around copyright controls. While it acknowledges that most of the people who criticized the law — at public hearings and via e-mail — \”expressed general opposition to the prohibitions on circumvention of technological protection measures contained in [the anti-circumvention clause section 1201], and noted their concerns about the adverse impact that section 1201 may have on fair use and other copyright exceptions,\” the Copyright Office, which falls under the authority of the Library of Congress, sidestepped public concern. . .

More from Salon (the free part.) The Copyright Office report can be found here.

Parents call book too explicit

Katie Pesznecker of the Anchorage Daily News writes:

\”Two parents of Anchorage grade school students say the sexual health book \”It\’s Perfectly Normal\” is not perfectly normal reading for their children and want it off school library shelves.\”

The book got national praise for it\’s \”normal\” look at sex education. Full Story

Smackdown at the Library

Bob Cox passed along a A Short Story on that WWF read-in that happened in MI the other day. WWF stars Stacy Keibler and Rhyno did the reading.


\”We\’re going for the reluctant reader, the male teenager that the WWF appeals to,\”

Salt Lake City PL New Director

Jill passed along more about SLC PL\’s new non-MLS director froma member of the board.

Full Story


\”Jim Cooper\’s business acumen, dedicated support for the library programs, ability to interact constructively with numerous constituencies and government interests and his deep commitment to the Salt Lake Valley community were viewed by the board as credentials more compelling than an advanced degree in library science. \”

Constitutional Freedom to Read Recognized

Luis Acosta writes \”There is an interesting item in today\’s Washington Post\’s \”District Extra\” section (not to be confused with the Metro section) about a U.S. District Court decision that recognizes the freedom to read:
Full Story

The decision at issue in the story is posted on the web page of the U.S.
District Court for the District of Columbia,
here.

While the defendant that lost is a public library, the decision recognizes the first amendment right to freedom to read/freedom of information, and therefore is good news.\”

Potter porn.

Calliope pass along This Story from MSNBC on the burgeoning Harry Potter Porn stories on the web. They say it\’s produced and consumed almost entirely by young women. Google Points The Way.

Warner Bros. is not very happy:

“It is not only our legal obligation, but also our moral obligation to protect the integrity of our intellectual properties,” the statement says. “This is especially true in the case of indecent infringement of any icon whose target audience is children.”

It\’s funny to read the have morals.

It Scans, It Formats, It Translates, but Can It Do This…?

There\’s a new version of software that will read scanned documents and convert the text into a format that you can edit. It also will recognize up to 114 languages. While it\’s doing all that, it\’ll even proof itself to make sure it captured every character from the original. Then, if you want it to, it\’ll read everything back to you, in one of 14 languages, over your computer\’s speakers. While that\’s all well and good, I\’m still waiting for the software program that will do the dishes, fix dinner, change diapers, put the laundry away, scoop out the litterbox, sort the trash, and walk the dog. more…

Separating Students from Smut

Katie Dean writes…

\”Over the next year, schools will be in danger of losing precious technology funding unless they can certify they have a filtering system that blocks obscene websites.
The Children\’s Internet Protection Act requires that by Oct. 28, schools must certify that they are either in compliance with filtering requirements, or are in the process of becoming compliant by evaluating blocking software. For many schools, it will be easy to comply. According to the Consortium for School Networking, 75 percent of schools use filtering already.\” more… from Wired News.