September 2009 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Primo IGF USA

by Antonella Giulia Pizzaleo

Buonasera, rinnovando a tutti l'invito a partecipare al prossimo Internet Governance Forum Italia (Pisa 5-7 ottobre 2009; www.igf-italia.it) segnalo una notizia molto importante per il processo degli IGF: il 2 ottobre prossimo si svolgerà il primo IGF statunitense http://www.igf-usa.us/page/program-1 Vi saluto, antonella -- Antonella Giulia Pizzaleo mobile: +39 3496064133 email: pizzaleo(a)gmail.com skype: antonellagiulia

Sept. 29, 2009

[Fwd: [A2k] KEI statement to 2009 WIPO General Assembly on SCCR work program]

by J.C. DE MARTIN

Segnalo questo intervento dei KEI alla WIPO General Assembly. jc -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [A2k] KEI statement to 2009 WIPO General Assembly on SCCR work program Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 16:10:35 -0400 From: James Love <jamespackardlove(a)gmail.com> To: a2k <a2k(a)lists.essential.org> Source URL: http://keionline.org/kei2009wipo-ga-sccr KEI statement to 2009 WIPO General Assembly on SCCR work program 28 Sept 2009 The following is the written statement for the record that KEI has provided to the WIPO General Assembly, on the topic of the work program for the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR). -------------- Congratulations on your election, and on the election of the vice-chairs Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) recommends that the topic of the broadcast treaty be removed from the SCCR agenda, for the following reasons. 1. the theft of copyrighted signals from broadcasting organizations is already illegal under copyright and regulatory laws. There is no evidence that new laws are needed to address this issue, and there is also no evidence that a treaty dealing exclusively with signal piracy will receive support from broadcasters. Broadcasters are actually seeking a new and expanded intellectual property right (IPR) in programs they assemble and distribute, but do not create. 2. Any new intellectual property rights for broadcasters will come at the expense of both consumers and the creative communities who are protected by copyright. New IPR for broadcasters will present additional layers of rights that will make it more costly and difficult to reuse information in ways that are legitimate under copyright laws. 3. Work on a broadcast treaty will come at the expense of work on copyright limitations and exceptions, which is more important for the public, to address important social needs. KEI encourages the SCCR to focus on a robust work program on copyright limitations and exceptions that addresses a broad set of exceptions, including those dealing with people with disabilities, libraries, education, distance education, archives, orphaned works, innovative services, translations, excessive pricing and the control of other anti-competitive practices. KEI does not believe that deep harmonization of all copyright limitations and exceptions is needed or appropriate in most cases. In general, it will be best if the global rules provide for the appropriate level of freedom to operate, so that national laws can experiment to find ways to balance and protect both consumers and creative communities, while using a diversity of approaches consistent with domestic legal traditions and values. However, in some special cases, global norms will be useful, including (in some cases) minimum limitations and exceptions for copyright. In particular, where cross-border uses of works or technologies are necessary, some global norms will be needed to stimulate public and private investments in such services. For example, cross-border uses that will or may benefit from global norms include: 1. the sharing of accessible works for persons who are blind or have other disabilities; 2. distance education, delivered across borders; 3. the cross border sharing of works by libraries; 4. the regulation of Digital Rights Management (DRM) and Technical Protection Measures (TPMs), as they relate to the exercise of legitimate uses of works, or the control of anti-competitive practices; and 5. the development of some innovative services, In future years, the SCCR may find it productive to consider new global rules for compulsory licensing of recorded music or orphaned works. The SCCR should also review the Appendix to the Berne, to determine if it has been successful in meeting its objectives, and if a new version of the Appendix is needed to improve its usefulness and relevance in addressing the objectives of the WIPO development agenda. Global norms are durable, and should be done correctly. While some of these projects are ready now, others may take many years before sufficient analysis, consultation and consensus emerges and there is a strong basis for global norm setting. A treaty for sharing works in accessible formats for persons who have reading disabilities can be done now, and is long overdue. WIPO considered global norms for this issue as early as 1982, and has received frequent petitions from the disabilities community to act. The proposal by Brazil, Equator and Paraguay provides a good basis for negotiations. In this regard, it should be noted that SCCR18/5 is inclusive in terms of reading disabilities, and provides countries considerable flexibility in terms of implementation on topics such as the works that are “legally available” for import under the exception, and the role of trusted intermediaries. The SCCR will of course find it useful to strengthen the proposal in certain areas, and KEI looks forward to the discussion at SCCR 19. KEI notes the work of WIPO on the Stakeholder Platform, and the concerns of developing countries regarding the need for transparency and participation by persons in developing countries. KEI is concerned that publishers have not participated directly in this process so far, and are instead represented by lobbyists for trade associations – people who cannot actually commit to licensing works for global distribution. KEI is concerned that some delegations have presented the stakeholder platform as a substitute for a global norm on the export and import of works created under a copyright exception. This is an uninformed and cruel misreading of mountains of evidence of the barriers to equality faced by the disabilities community. Other WIPO delegates have suggested privately that the needs of the reading disabilities community can be satisfied by a statement at the WIPO General Assembly that the exporting and importing of works created under an exception comport with the TRIPS and the Berne, leaving the implementation up to national action, without a treaty instrument. While such an approach does offer some benefits, it will predictably have far less benefit than a treaty instrument, which will certainly lead to greater use of the cross-border sharing of works. The best evidence of the importance of a treaty or binding trade agreements is the vigor with which the copyright owners themselves press for such measures at WIPO, and fora outside of WIPO. Why has WIPO considered the WCT and the WPPT, and more recently a treaty for broadcasters or audiovisual performances, if not for the fact that a treaty itself is the most powerful way to advance a new global norm, and to promote implementation of that norm? If WIPO only provides a declaration that imports and exports are legally allowed, but fails to provide a framework for authorizing the cross border sharing of accessible works, many countries will take years, and perhaps never change their laws to create the enabling legal environment. Just as the WCT was designed to accelerate the adoption of legal protections of DRM/TPM measures, and to provide for a common framework for expansions of other rights for copyright owners, the treaty for reading disabilities is design to promote rapid implementation of a new global platform for sharing accessible works. Work on disabilities should be considered an issue of human rights, and a logical implementation of obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. While a treaty for sharing accessible formats of works is consistent with the Development Agenda, KEI cautions WIPO against framing such a treaty as a developing country issue only. Persons with reading disabilities live everywhere, have very different levels of access to technologies, and use different languages. The benefits of an expanded sharing of works will be particularly important for countries that need access to accessible works from foreign countries, and have the capacity to use them. Work on reading disabilities should not be delayed until a broader work program on copyright limitations and exceptions is completed, and indeed, neither should work on distance education, libraries or other topics be limited by requirements that the entire work program be finished. For norm setting, the SCCR should move each project forward when it is ready – not before, and not much after. In the case of reading disabilities, the SCCR should aim to authorize a diplomatic conference at the 2010 General Assembly meeting. That diplomatic conference should be held as early as Spring 2011. Work on other norm setting activities involving limitations and exceptions should go forward in parallel, including but not limited to proposals that may be offered in the areas of distance education and libraries. _______________________________________________ A2k mailing list A2k(a)lists.essential.org http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k

Sept. 28, 2009

QdN: "Act now! The future of EU Internet may be sealed tonight."

by J.C. DE MARTIN

http://www.laquadrature.net/en/act-now-the-future-of-eu-internet-may-be-sea… Act now! The future of EU Internet may be sealed tonight. By /pi/ Created /27 Sep 2009 - 20:06/ Brussels, September 28th - *The first conciliation meeting on the Telecoms Package will take place tonight at 9:30PM. In this meeting, 27 Members of the European Parliament and 27 representatives of the Council of EU will decide on the future of Internet in Europe. They will choose whether to fix or maintain the dreadful anti-Net neutrality dispositions voted in second reading by the Parliament, under the influence of AT&T. Rapporteurs and representatives of the Swedish Presidency opposed this idea so far. European citizens only have a few hours to urge MEPs to preserve Europe's innovation, competition, and citizen's fundamental rights.* The inaugural meeting of Conciliation phase on the Telecoms Package will gather 27 Members of the European Parliament delegation, and 27 representatives of the ministers of the Member States, on Monday, September 28th, at 9:30PM. During this procedure, the whole European regulatory framework of the Internet will be negotiated. In the first meeting, members of the committe will decide on the crucial perimeter of the negotiations. From this decision will depend the fate of Net neutrality in Europe. So far, the rapporteur Catherine Trautmann and the minister in charge for the Swedish Presidency Åsa Torstensson expressed their will to deal only with the "amendment 138", which the Council wants to get rid of1 <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/print/2356#footnote1_g2luyzn> [1]. This would mean that the dreadful provisions allowing operators to kill Net neutrality in order to get control of the Internet2 <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/print/2356#footnote2_odnzyb3> [2]. These provisions allowing for limiting access to Internet services and applications, voted in second reading under influence by AT&T <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/technology/08iht-neutral.1.20669185.html?…> [3]3 <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/print/2356#footnote3_0casbx2> [4], would then become law in Europe. */"Trautmann and Torstensson are trying to make everyone believe that Net neutrality should be dealt separately, after the Telecoms Package, but this is just a bad excuse. They know that Net neutrality is already in the Telecoms Package, because AT&T amendments allows operators to kill it to take control of the Net. They must admit it and do what is best for Europe's competitiveness and citizens's fundamental rights, at any cost. Internet is much more important for the future of our societies than the efficiency of the EU legislative process."/* explains Jérémie Zimmermann, spokesperson for citizen advocacy group La Quadrature du Net. Citizens from all Member States have a few hours left to call <http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Call_conciliation_MEPs_sept28> [5] all the Members of the European Parliament delegation in the conciliation committee4 <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/print/2356#footnote4_b9wl4u5> [6]. They can find arguments in the letter sent to them by La Quadrature <http://www.laquadrature.net/files/LaQuadratureduNet-20090928-Letter_to_the_…> [7]5 <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/print/2356#footnote5_mi6sagd> [8] along with the Open letter <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/we-must-protect-net-neutrality-in-europe-ope…> [9]6 <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/print/2356#footnote6_z7rd074> [10] signed by more than 70 NGOs across 15 Member States (including ISOC, CCC, Reporters without Borders, and major consumers unions) , in a 2-pager memo <http://laquadrature.net/files/LaQuadratureduNet-20090922-Note_Protecting_Ne…> [11] and in a complete 22-pages dossier about Net neutrality <http://laquadrature.net/files/LaQuadratureduNet-DOSSIER_Protecting_Net_Neut…> [12]. */"Conciliation must leave room for a clear legislative statement affirming that the fundamental principles of a non-discriminatory Internet have higher status than the short-term convenience of specific interest business models. It is very important that citizens who love the Internet act together now. We need to use this unique opportunity to help European lawmakers avoid making an irremediable mistake. "/* concludes Zimmermann. 1. 1. <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/print/2356#footnoteref1_g2luyzn> [13] Amendment 138 states that restrictions to fundamental rights and freedoms such as access to the Internet must be subject to a prior ruling by the judicial authority. This was confirmed by a decision of the highest French jurisdiction, the Consitutional council, on the "three strikes" policy. The Council added that "In the current state of the means of communication and given the generalized development of public online communication services and the importance of the latter for the participation in democracy and the expression of ideas and opinions, this right implies freedom to access such services." 2. 2. <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/print/2356#footnoteref2_odnzyb3> [14] Located in Articles 20.1.b and 21.3.b of the Universal Service Directive, it allows for "conditions limiting access to and/or use of services and applications". 3. 3. <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/print/2356#footnoteref3_0casbx2> [15] http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/technology/08iht-neutral.1.20669185.html?… 4. 4. <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/print/2356#footnoteref4_b9wl4u5> [16] A specific campagne page: http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Call_conciliation_MEPs_sept28 5. 5. <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/print/2356#footnoteref5_mi6sagd> [17] http://www.laquadrature.net/files/LaQuadratureduNet-20090928-Letter_to_the_… 6. 6. <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/print/2356#footnoteref6_z7rd074> [18] Open letter "We must save Net neutrality!" with full list of signatories: http://www.laquadrature.net/en/we-must-protect-net-neutrality-in-europe-ope… * telecoms package <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/tag/themes/telecom-package> * Net neutrality | Net discrimination <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/tag/themes/net-discrimination> * Harbour <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/tag/personnalites/harbour> * Trautmann <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/tag/personnalites/trautmann> * Torstensson <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/torstensson> * press release <http://www.laquadrature.net/en/tag/types-de-documents/press-release> (CC)BySa - La Quadrature du Net - 2009 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Source URL:* http://www.laquadrature.net/en/act-now-the-future-of-eu-internet-may-be-sea… *Links:* [1] http://www.laquadrature.net/en/act-now-the-future-of-eu-internet-may-be-sea… [2] http://www.laquadrature.net/en/act-now-the-future-of-eu-internet-may-be-sea… [3] http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/technology/08iht-neutral.1.20669185.html?… [4] http://www.laquadrature.net/en/act-now-the-future-of-eu-internet-may-be-sea… [5] http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Call_conciliation_MEPs_sept28 [6] http://www.laquadrature.net/en/act-now-the-future-of-eu-internet-may-be-sea… [7] http://www.laquadrature.net/files/LaQuadratureduNet-20090928-Letter_to_the_… [8] http://www.laquadrature.net/en/act-now-the-future-of-eu-internet-may-be-sea… [9] http://www.laquadrature.net/en/we-must-protect-net-neutrality-in-europe-ope… [10] http://www.laquadrature.net/en/act-now-the-future-of-eu-internet-may-be-sea… [11] http://laquadrature.net/files/LaQuadratureduNet-20090922-Note_Protecting_Ne… [12] http://laquadrature.net/files/LaQuadratureduNet-DOSSIER_Protecting_Net_Neut… [13] http://www.laquadrature.net/en/act-now-the-future-of-eu-internet-may-be-sea… [14] http://www.laquadrature.net/en/act-now-the-future-of-eu-internet-may-be-sea… [15] http://www.laquadrature.net/en/act-now-the-future-of-eu-internet-may-be-sea… [16] http://www.laquadrature.net/en/act-now-the-future-of-eu-internet-may-be-sea… [17] http://www.laquadrature.net/en/act-now-the-future-of-eu-internet-may-be-sea… [18] http://www.laquadrature.net/en/act-now-the-future-of-eu-internet-may-be-sea…

Sept. 28, 2009

Re: [nexa] [Fwd: [Oa-italia] 5 università firmano uno statement per sostenere il modello author-pays]

by David Orban

JC, grazie dell'invito! In quel giorno ho degli impegni per cui non potrò venire. Spero che avremo modo comunque di sentirci per approfondire l'argomento. David Orban skype, twitter, linkedin, sl, etc: davidorban 2009/9/27 J.C. DE MARTIN <demartin(a)polito.it>: > Caro David, > > il tema mi sta ovviamente molto a cuore. > Perche' non vieni al prossimo mercoledi' di nexa, > il 14 ottobre, cosi' ti racconto un po' di cose in proposito? > > Intanto pero' ti segnalo questo nostro tentativo > di mandare avanti qualcosa a livello locale > lo scorso aprile: > http://universita-aperta.it/ > > Ciao, > > juan carlos > > > > David Orban wrote (on 21/09/2009 14.09): > > Uso questo thread per un argomento parallelo. Ho visto su > http://www.ocwconsortium.org/members/consortium-members.html che non > ci sono Università italiane che aderiscono all'Open Courseware > Consortium. Ce ne sono 38 spagnole, tre olandesi, dell'Iran, Sud > Africa, ecc. nonché più di un centinaio degli USA. > > Nessuna Università italiana... Nelle Università italiane i corsi > online sono a numero chiuso. Evidentemente internet si satura. Oppure > finiscono l'inchiostro per le pagine web. Non per gli esami: è chiusa > l'iscrizione per vedere i materiali dei corsi! > > Mi interessa approfondire quali sono i meccanismi che hanno creato > questa situazione e come scardinarli. > Qualcuno ha delle informazioni in merito? > > David Orban > skype, twitter, linkedin, sl, etc: davidorban > > > 2009/9/17 J.C. DE MARTIN <demartin(a)polito.it>: > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [Oa-italia] 5 università firmano uno statement per sostenere il > modello author-pays > Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:12:21 +0200 > From: Maria Cassella <maria.cassella(a)unito.it> > Reply-To: Lista di discussione su temi relativi all'accesso aperto > <oa-italia(a)openarchives.it> > To: Lista di discussione su temi relativi all'accesso aperto > <oa-italia(a)openarchives.it> > > 5 università (Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Harvard University, > MIT e UC Berkeley) hanno firmato uno *statement* congiunto per sostenere > "reasonable publication charges for articles written by its faculty and > published in fee-based open-access journals" . > la notizia su Library Journal > http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6696797.html?rssid=191 > saluti > mc > > -- > > > > > _______________________________________________ > OA-Italia mailing list > OA-Italia(a)openarchives.it > http://openarchives.it/mailman/listinfo/oa-italia > PLEIADI: http://www.openarchives.it/pleiadi/ > > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > > > > >

Sept. 27, 2009

Re: [nexa] [Fwd: [Oa-italia] 5 università firmano uno statement per sostenere il modello author-pays]

by J.C. DE MARTIN

Caro David, il tema mi sta ovviamente molto a cuore. Perche' non vieni al prossimo mercoledi' di nexa, il 14 ottobre, cosi' ti racconto un po' di cose in proposito? Intanto pero' ti segnalo questo nostro tentativo di mandare avanti qualcosa a livello locale lo scorso aprile: http://universita-aperta.it/ Ciao, juan carlos David Orban wrote (on 21/09/2009 14.09): > Uso questo thread per un argomento parallelo. Ho visto su > http://www.ocwconsortium.org/members/consortium-members.html che non > ci sono Università italiane che aderiscono all'Open Courseware > Consortium. Ce ne sono 38 spagnole, tre olandesi, dell'Iran, Sud > Africa, ecc. nonché più di un centinaio degli USA. > > Nessuna Università italiana... Nelle Università italiane i corsi > online sono a numero chiuso. Evidentemente internet si satura. Oppure > finiscono l'inchiostro per le pagine web. Non per gli esami: è chiusa > l'iscrizione per vedere i materiali dei corsi! > > Mi interessa approfondire quali sono i meccanismi che hanno creato > questa situazione e come scardinarli. > Qualcuno ha delle informazioni in merito? > > David Orban > skype, twitter, linkedin, sl, etc: davidorban > > > 2009/9/17 J.C. DE MARTIN <demartin(a)polito.it>: > >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: [Oa-italia] 5 università firmano uno statement per sostenere il >> modello author-pays >> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:12:21 +0200 >> From: Maria Cassella <maria.cassella(a)unito.it> >> Reply-To: Lista di discussione su temi relativi all'accesso aperto >> <oa-italia(a)openarchives.it> >> To: Lista di discussione su temi relativi all'accesso aperto >> <oa-italia(a)openarchives.it> >> >> 5 università (Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Harvard University, >> MIT e UC Berkeley) hanno firmato uno *statement* congiunto per sostenere >> "reasonable publication charges for articles written by its faculty and >> published in fee-based open-access journals" . >> la notizia su Library Journal >> http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6696797.html?rssid=191 >> saluti >> mc >> >> -- >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OA-Italia mailing list >> OA-Italia(a)openarchives.it >> http://openarchives.it/mailman/listinfo/oa-italia >> PLEIADI: http://www.openarchives.it/pleiadi/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >> >> >> > >

Sept. 27, 2009

Lessig manda il suo blog in letargo

by J.C. DE MARTIN

http://lessig.org/blog/2009/08/announcing_the_hibernation_of.html Announcing the hibernation of lessig.org/blog (from the blogs-deserve-a-sabbatical-too department) August 20, 2009 2:15 AM - comments (69) So my blog turns seven today. On August 20, 2002, while hiding north of San Francisco working on the Eldred appeal, I penned my first (wildly and embarrassingly defensive) missive to Dave. Some 1753 entries later, I'm letting the blog rest. This will be the last post in this frame. Who knows what the future will bring, but in the near term, it won't bring more in lessig.org/blog. The reasons are many. First, as I peer over the abyss of child number 3 (expected in a couple weeks), I can't begin to imagine how I would be able to allocate the time to give this space the attention it needs. I've already fretted about my failure to give this community the time it deserves in REMIX. Things will only get worse. Second, even if I could, I'm entering a stage of my work when the ratio of speaking to reading/listening/thinking is changing significantly. I've just taken up my role as director of the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard. As announced, this means the launch of a 5 year research project on institutional corruption. While I expect that project will have a critical cyber-presence, I don't want its life to be framed by this blog. The mission, the understanding, the community is different. Third, even if I could, and even if the work I was doing meant I should, there's an increasingly technical burden to maintaining a blog that I don't have the cycles to support. Some very good friends -- Theo Armour and M. David Peterson -- have been volunteering time to do the mechanics of site maintenance. That has gotten overwhelming. Theo estimates that 1/3 of the 30,000 comments that were posted to the blog over these 7 years were fraudsters. He's been working endlessly to remove them. At one point late last year, Google kicked me off their index because too many illegal casino sites were linking from the bowels of my server. I know some will respond with the equivalent of "you should have put bars on your windows and double bolted locks on your front door." Maybe. Or maybe had legislatures devoted 1/10th the energy devoted to the copyright wars to addressing this muck, it might be easier for free speech to be free. This isn't an announcement of my disappearance. I'm still trying to understand twitter. My channel at blip.tv will remain. As will the podcast, updated as I speak. I will continue to guest blog at Huffington Post. And as Change-Congress.org enters a new stage, I hope to be doing more there. But this community, this space, this board will now rest. Thank you to the endless list of people who have helped make this place as it is, or was. Theo and M. David especially. Marc Perkel for his free hosting at ctyme.com for so many years. And thank you especially to the inhabitants of this space, especially the fantastic commentators and loyal backbenchers (Three Blind Mice, you have to reveal yourself now and let me buy you a beer). I have enjoyed this wildly more than I have not (again, I whine in REMIX about the not). And I have been very proud to be responsible for certain bits of content -- especially the guest blogging by the interesting and famous (Howard Dean was a favorite, and I will always be proud that I got Judge Posner to experiment with blogging, leading to his wonderful blog with Gary Becker). Comments on this post will remain open for a week. And then comments on all posts will be locked. Thank you to everyone, again. Posted by Lawrence Lessig on August 20, 2009 2:15 AM | Permalink

Sept. 27, 2009

Re: [nexa] Progetto di Legge 2525, Camera Dei Deputati - Diritto d'Autore

by a.dicorinto＠uniroma1.it

.... Beh, in ogni caso, complimenti e buon lavoro Art

Sept. 27, 2009

Progetto di Legge 2525, Camera Dei Deputati - Diritto d'Autore

by marco scialdone

Ciao a tutt*, http://www.camera.it/_dati/leg16/lavori/schedela/trovaschedacamera_wai.asp?… Qui trovate un testo di riforma di alcune disposizioni della L.d.A. cui ho messo mano negli ultimi mesi insieme all'On. Cassinelli. Il testo è stato assegnato il 24 settembre u.s. alla Commissione cultura della Camera. In parte riprende il lavoro fatto ai tempi della Commissione Gambino, in parte lo amplia e cerca (almeno questo è l'intento che abbiamo cercato di esplicitare nella relazione introduttiva) di far comprendere come alcune modifiche siano funzionali ad un miglioramento dell'impianto complessivo della legge. Non so quanta strada farà, probabilmente non ne farà :-) M. -- Avv. Marco Scialdone Blog: http://scialdone.blogspot.com Site: www.computerlaw.it BlackBerry PIN:20D30DDB Skype: marco_scialdone MSN: marcoscialdone76(a)hotmail.com My profile: www.linkedin.com/in/marcoscialdone CC Network: https://creativecommons.net/marcoscialdone/

Sept. 27, 2009

Re: [nexa] Liberta' di espressione su Internet: la proposta di legge Pecorella

by J.C. DE MARTIN

Caro Arturo, scusa per il ritardo con cui ti rispondo, ma venerdi' abbiamo avuto la visita a Torino del project officer europeo del progetto COMMUNIA e la cosa ci ha assorbiti completamente. Il protocollo d'azione che avete istituito mi sembra molto importante per arrivare ad avere massa critica e quindi peso mediatico e politico. Penso, infatti, che sia innegabile che in Italia le persone sensibili ai nostri temi siano comunque molte (per quanto minoranza) ma tipicamente disperse. La vostra soluzione federata mi sembra il modo migliore per preservare pluralismo e efficacia. Il Centro NEXA su Internet & Societa', in quanto centro di ricerca accademico, non potra' ovviamente aderire, ma questo e' normale: in un ecosistema sano, infatti, gli attori sono diversificati, con rispettive fisionomie e campi di azione, e cio' e' segno di salute del sistema complessivo. Adesso o in futuro ti venissero in mente possibili sinergie, non esitare a parlarmene! Intanto, ancora bravi, a presto! juan carlos a.dicorinto(a)uniroma1.it wrote (on 19-09-2009 12:48): > > La proposta Pecorella-Costa è inquietante e ci convince una volta di > più di quanto i "governi democratici" siano "nemici" di Internet e > della libertà che essa promuove e rappresenta. > Anche per questo abbiamo creato una proposta da condividere con tutto > il mondo della rete. Diteci anche voi cosa ne pensate e come si possa > migliorare. > > http://frontieredigitali.net/index.php/Protocollo_d%E2%80%99azione_di_Front… > > cheers >

Sept. 27, 2009

NYRB: Massing, "A New Horizon for the News"

by J.C. DE MARTIN

Volume 56, Number 14 · September 24, 2009 A New Horizon for the News By Michael Massing The American news business today finds itself trapped in a grim paradox. Financially, its prospects have never seemed bleaker. By some measures, the first quarter of 2009 was the worst ever for newspapers, with sales plunging $2.6 billion. Last year, circulation dropped on average by 4.6 percent on weekdays and 4.8 percent on Sundays. Earlier this year, Detroit's two daily papers reduced home delivery to three days a week, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer ended its print edition, and the Rocky Mountain News shut down altogether. This summer, The Boston Globe, which is losing more than $50 million a year, survived only by giving in to the draconian cutbacks demanded by its owner, the New York Times Company, while the Times itself, weighed down by the Globe, had to take out a $250 million loan from Carlos Slim Helú, Mexico's richest man, at a junk-bond-level interest rate of 14 percent a year. Yet amid all this gloom, statistics from the Internet suggest that interest in news has rarely been greater. According to one survey, Internet users in 2008 spent fifty-three minutes a week reading newspapers online, up from forty-one minutes in 2007. And the traffic at the top fifty news Web sites increased by 27 percent. While this growth cut across all age groups, the Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism found, "it was fueled in particular by young people." The MTV generation, known for its indifference to news, has given way to the Obama generation, which craves it, and for an industry long reconciled to the idea of its customers dying off, the reengagement of America's young offers a rare ray of hope. Continua qui: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/23050

Sept. 24, 2009