Nick Bilton, New York Times; Disruptions: Innovations Snuffed Out by Craigslist:
"“The listings are already out there. We’re finding them already on the Web and organizing them so other people don’t have to do the same thing twice,” said Greg Kidd, the chief executive of 3Taps. “And we’re not breaking any laws because we are pulling in the facts from the listing; everyone knows you can’t copyright facts.” Craigslist also named 3Taps in the lawsuit filed last week.
As intellectual property lawyers will tell you, Mr. Kidd is not off base: facts, like those in classified listings, cannot be copyrighted.
So why hasn’t anyone managed to unseat Craigslist, a site that has barely changed in close to two decades?
It has dug an effective moat by cultivating an exaggerated image of “doing good” that keeps its customers loyal, while behind the scenes, it bullies any rivals that come near and it stifles innovation."
Showing posts with label discouraging innovation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label discouraging innovation. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Internet companies urge Mandelson to delete clause from digital economy bill; Guardian, 12/
Katie Allen, Guardian; Internet companies urge Mandelson to delete clause from digital economy bill:
Google, Facebook, Yahoo and eBay call on business secretary not to grant wide powers to ministers to alter copyright law
"Leading internet companies including Google have written to business secretary Peter Mandelson urging him to change the new digital economy bill to throw out a controversial clause that could give future ministers sweeping powers to change copyright law.
Their letter, sent to coincide with today's second reading of the recently announced bill in the Lords, voices support for parts of the bill and a "shared respect" for copyright. But Google, Facebook, Yahoo and eBay also express "grave concerns" over proposed measures "which risk stifling innovation and damaging the government's vision for a digital Britain."
They highlight elements of Mandelson's bill introduced at the 11th hour: "In particular, we believe the bill's clause 17 – which gives any future secretary of state unprecedented and sweeping powers to amend the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 – opens the way for arbitrary measures. This power could be used, for example, to introduce additional technical measures or increase monitoring of user data even where no illegal practice has taken place," the letter said.
The internet companies warn that such an unclear copyright backdrop could run counter to former communications minister Stephen Carter's Digital Britain report, which examined ways to ensure the UK remained at the leading edge of the global digital economy.
"This would discourage innovation, impose unnecessary costs, potentially unsettling the careful balance of responsibilities for enabling market change which Lord Carter outlined in the Digital Britain report," the letter said. "This clause is so wide that it could put at risk legitimate consumer use of current technology as well as future developments ... The industry as a whole had hoped that the outcome of Digital Britain would be a clear, workable set of principles by which the industry could operate. On the contrary, clause 17 creates uncertainty for consumers and businesses and puts at risk the UK's leading position in a digital Europe. We urge you to remove clause 17 from the bill."
A spokesman for Mandelson's department sought to reassure the internet companies the government would not abuse any future powers.
"The law must keep pace with technology, so that the government can act if new ways of seriously infringing copyright develop in the future. However, business will not wake up one morning to a world in which government has taken extensive digital powers," he said.
While the digital economy bill was welcomed by many media companies, which feel their copyright on music, film and other content need better protection online, it has also faced a large amount of opposition from internet service providers and consumer groups.
Carphone Warehouse boss Charles Dunstone recently condemned as "crazy" plans to combat online piracy by severing people's broadband connections. The group's broadband arm, TalkTalk, has threatened to take legal action if proposals to cut off persistent unlawful online file sharers make it into law.
An e-petition on the No 10 website against the law has already garnered more than 28,000 signatories and the support of such technophiles as Stephen Fry."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/dec/02/digital-economy-bill-google-facebook
Google, Facebook, Yahoo and eBay call on business secretary not to grant wide powers to ministers to alter copyright law
"Leading internet companies including Google have written to business secretary Peter Mandelson urging him to change the new digital economy bill to throw out a controversial clause that could give future ministers sweeping powers to change copyright law.
Their letter, sent to coincide with today's second reading of the recently announced bill in the Lords, voices support for parts of the bill and a "shared respect" for copyright. But Google, Facebook, Yahoo and eBay also express "grave concerns" over proposed measures "which risk stifling innovation and damaging the government's vision for a digital Britain."
They highlight elements of Mandelson's bill introduced at the 11th hour: "In particular, we believe the bill's clause 17 – which gives any future secretary of state unprecedented and sweeping powers to amend the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 – opens the way for arbitrary measures. This power could be used, for example, to introduce additional technical measures or increase monitoring of user data even where no illegal practice has taken place," the letter said.
The internet companies warn that such an unclear copyright backdrop could run counter to former communications minister Stephen Carter's Digital Britain report, which examined ways to ensure the UK remained at the leading edge of the global digital economy.
"This would discourage innovation, impose unnecessary costs, potentially unsettling the careful balance of responsibilities for enabling market change which Lord Carter outlined in the Digital Britain report," the letter said. "This clause is so wide that it could put at risk legitimate consumer use of current technology as well as future developments ... The industry as a whole had hoped that the outcome of Digital Britain would be a clear, workable set of principles by which the industry could operate. On the contrary, clause 17 creates uncertainty for consumers and businesses and puts at risk the UK's leading position in a digital Europe. We urge you to remove clause 17 from the bill."
A spokesman for Mandelson's department sought to reassure the internet companies the government would not abuse any future powers.
"The law must keep pace with technology, so that the government can act if new ways of seriously infringing copyright develop in the future. However, business will not wake up one morning to a world in which government has taken extensive digital powers," he said.
While the digital economy bill was welcomed by many media companies, which feel their copyright on music, film and other content need better protection online, it has also faced a large amount of opposition from internet service providers and consumer groups.
Carphone Warehouse boss Charles Dunstone recently condemned as "crazy" plans to combat online piracy by severing people's broadband connections. The group's broadband arm, TalkTalk, has threatened to take legal action if proposals to cut off persistent unlawful online file sharers make it into law.
An e-petition on the No 10 website against the law has already garnered more than 28,000 signatories and the support of such technophiles as Stephen Fry."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/dec/02/digital-economy-bill-google-facebook
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)