Comments on: A call to action

By: Scholarly Communications @ Duke » What has changed

Scholarly Communications @ Duke » What has changed — Wed, 27 May 2009 16:08:11 +0000

[...] between copyright and free expression. So the question presents itself, do I just not get it, as at least one commenter seems to think, or has something changed to make reliance on fair use and idea/expression inadequate these [...]

By: Scholarly Communications @ Duke » Congress shall make no law

Scholarly Communications @ Duke » Congress shall make no law — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 12:29:15 +0000

[...] up on my earlier post about Anthony Falzone’s lecture and his strong emphasis on the need to limit copyright to the minimum protection necessary to [...]

By: Sandy Thatcher

Sandy Thatcher — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 11:23:12 +0000

This could be a hard sell to the U.S. Supreme Court, which in cases like Harper & Row v. The Nation went out of its way to stress that First Amendment rights and copyright are NOT opposed but rather mutually reinforcing. I would be interested in seeing how, in detail, Falzone attempts to argue this point, as it is not obvious on the face of it as baldly stated here. Is it that, somehow, the Obama poster is so unique as a medium of expression that the “idea” embedded in it cannot be conveyed in any other way? So, for some works, presumably, expression and idea cannot be separated? Maybe so, but if one admits a few special cases like this, surely it is a long leap to a general argument along these lines pertaining universally.

By: MsAisha

MsAisha — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 15:11:37 +0000

Thanks for the summary Kevin. I couldn’t attend the Chapel Hill talk and look forward to the podcast. This is a NEW way to think about this issue even though it seems so apparent now. It is amazing the things we begin to accept as a society simply because they have been codified as law through out the years.