November 2011 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

New Book: Intellectual Property Strategy
by a.dicorinto＠uniroma1.it Nov. 14, 2011

Nov. 14, 2011

1 0

IP and Competition Seminar Series
by aura.bertoni＠unibocconi.it Nov. 14, 2011

Nov. 14, 2011

Cari tutti, ho il piacere segnalare alla lista Nexa la nuova edizione della IP and Competition Seminar Series organizzata dal Dipartimento di Diritto "Angelo Sraffa" insieme al centro ASK (Arts, Science and Knowledge) che prenderà il via venerdì 18 Novembre presso l'Università Bocconi. Nel primo appuntamento il professor Dan L. Burk, University of California, Irvine, discuterà del tema "Copyright and Paratext Computer Gaming". Per la registrazione e maggiori dettagli, vi allego il programma. Aura Aura Bertoni Bocconi University Department of Law Via Roentgen 1 20136 Milan Italy +39 02 5836 5581

1 0

Vox (scientific paper): "Is the Sky Falling? The quality of new recorded music since Napster"
by J.C. DE MARTIN Nov. 14, 2011

Nov. 14, 2011

http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/7274 Is the Sky Falling? The quality of new recorded music since Napster Joel Waldfogel <http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/4194> 14 November 2011 / Napster -- the first peer-to-peer file sharing service -- changed the music industry forever. Many people now download music without paying, often illegally. This column looks at the effect on the music industry, in particular what it means for the quality of new recorded music. / A dozen years ago a program was created called Napster. It made it easy for ordinary people to download music from their friends and people they had never met. Despite the rock 'n' roll ideals of free music for everyone, it changed the music industry forever -- some would say for the worse. Since then, intellectual property rights have been substantially weakened. Unfettered stealing has caused revenues to the recorded music industry to tumble by roughly one third. While this reversal has prompted academic chin-scratching over its cause, most observers now agree that consumers' ability to steal music undermines firms' ability to sell it.^1 <http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/7274#fn> The woes of the recorded music industry, along with fears of the movie, television, and book industries, have led many to advocate stronger legal protections for intellectual property, including private lawsuits, and threats of disconnection from internet service. While the question of whether stealing undermines selling is of vital interest to the recorded music business, it is arguably not the only important question for evaluating the success of intellectual property rules. The purpose of copyright laws is to provide incentives for the creation of new works. Weakened intellectual property protections present a threat to consumers as well as producers. If producers cannot appropriate sufficient revenue to cover their costs, they may stop bringing new products to market, causing harm to consumers as well as producers. Keeping this in mind focuses attention on a different question. What has happened to the volume -- and quality -- of new works since Napster? Three approaches to documenting quality Documenting the volume of high-quality work is challenging, but in recent work I have developed three approaches to characterising the evolution of music quality over time. The first approach makes use of critics' retrospective best lists, such as Rolling Stone's list of the 500 best albums of all time.^2 <http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/7274#fn> Inclusion of a work on such a list means that it has quality above some time-constant threshold. Each list can be transformed into an index showing the number of listed works originally released in each year. I have 88 such lists from Anglophone sources, together covering the period between 1960 and 2010. These lists' associated indices can be combined statistically to produce an overall index of music quality. As Figure 1 shows, the index rises from 1960 to 1970, then falls, remaining low during the 1980s. The index rises during the first half of the 1990s, then falls in the second half. Following 2000, the decline stops, and the index is flat. The critic-based index provides no evidence of a decline in recorded music quality since Napster. *Figure 1* The second and third approaches make use of information on the service flow of recorded music, based on sales and radio airplay, by time and vintage.^3 <http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/7274#fn> For example, I observe the share of music on US radio in 2008 that was originally released in 2008 and each preceding year. I observe the analogous vintage distribution for music aired in each year back to 2004. I also observe coarse data on music sales by year and vintage, so I observe the share of music sold in, say, 2010 that was originally released in 2010 and in each previous year. I observe analogous sales data back to 1970. In any given year, shares vary across vintage for two reasons. First, music depreciates - music sells less, and is played less on the radio, as it gets older. Second, vintages may differ in their quality. If the quality of music had declined after 2000, then we would expect elevated use of older vintages after 2000, controlling for deprecation. Thus, if I can account for depreciation, the remaining variation in use by original vintage should reflect vintage quality. To this end, I regress the log share of music used in a year t from vintage v on a flexible set of age dummies (to account for depreciation), along with a flexible set of vintage dummies. The coefficients on vintage dummies show the evolution of vintage quality over time. The results Results are interesting. The airplay data allow me to infer vintage quality back to 1960 and exhibit the following pattern (in Figure 2) - quality rises from 1960 to 1970, then falls and remains flat from 1980 to about 1999, with a small bump up in the mid-1990s. After 2000, vintage quality rises sharply, reaching levels not seen since the 1970s. The sales data, which produce an index going only back to 1970, suggest a similar story - vintage quality declines from 1970 to 1980, is flat to 2000, then rises after 2000 (see Figure 3). Two points are in order about these results. First, the three approaches, while independent of one another, produce broadly similar patterns from 1960-2000. Second, none of the three approaches shows a decline in quality following 2000; and two of them -- based on actual music usage -- show substantial increases. *Figure 2* *Figure 3* These results are, at first blush, puzzling -- how could the flow of high-quality music continue despite sharp reductions in firms' ability to appropriate revenue. The puzzle's resolution may lie in the observation that technological change has not only reduced effective demand; it has also reduced costs of bringing music to market. The costs of creation, promotion, and distribution have all been revolutionised by new information and communications technologies. Conclusion While the traditional purveyors of recorded music -- the major record labels -- have suffered since Napster, good music has continued to make its way to market. Independent labels account for a growing share of successful music, measured both by critical acclaim and sales. While many producers of recorded music have been made worse off by changes in technology, there is no evidence that the volume of high-quality music, or consumers, have suffered. Many caveats are in order, however. Chiefly, it is not clear whether the results extend to other content industries where creation remains quite expensive. But the results are a reminder that an evaluation of copyright policy should be cognisant of its effects on both producers and consumers. References Liebowitz, Stan J (2006), "File Sharing: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction? <http://csaweb111v.csa.com/ids70/view_record.php?id=17&recnum=8&log=from_res…>", /Journal of Law and Economics/, 49(1), 1-28. Oberholzer-Gee, Felix and Koleman Strumpf (2007), "The Effect of File Sharing on Record Sales: An Empirical Analysis", /Journal of Political Economy,/ 115(1):1--42. Rob, Rafael and Joel Waldfogel (2006), "Piracy on the High C's: Music Downloading, Sales Displacement, and Social Welfare in a Sample of College Students", /Journal of Law & Economics/, 49(1):29-62. Waldfogel, Joel (2011a), "Bye, Bye, Miss American Pie: The Supply of New Recorded Music since Napster <http://www.nber.org/papers/w16882>", NBER Working Paper 16882. Waldfogel, Joel (2011b), "Copyright Protection, Technological Change, and the Quality of New Products: Evidence from Recorded Music Since Napster <http://www.nber.org/papers/w17503>", NBER Working Paper 17503. Zentner, Alejandro (2006), "Measuring the Effect of File Sharing on Music Purchases <http://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlawec/y2006v49i1p63-90.html>", /The Journal of Law and Economics/, 49(1):63--90. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 Oberholzer-Gee and Strumpf (2007) find little or no impact of file sharing on recorded music sales. Most other studies, include Liebowitz (2006 ), Zentner (2006), and Rob and Waldfogel (2006) find a depressing effect of file sharing on legal sales. 2 This approach is described in detail in Waldfogel (2011a). 3 These approaches, along with a summary of the first approach, are described in Waldfogel (2011b). /This article may be reproduced with appropriate attribution. See Copyright (below)./

1 0

Repubblica: Intervista di Luna a Berners Lee
by J.C. DE MARTIN Nov. 14, 2011

Nov. 14, 2011

L'INTERVISTA "Così ho regalato il web al mondo" Parla Tim Berners Lee, il padre del www. "Con la mia invenzione non mi sono arricchito e c'è ancora una sfida da vincere: il divario digitale. Oggi festeggia a Roma i 20 anni della sua creatura /di RICCARDO LUNA/ "NON C'E' STATO un momento "eureka" nella creazione del Web. Un momento preciso in cui ho detto: è fatta! È stato piuttosto un percorso lungo. Se devo indicare un inizio potrebbe essere addirittura il 1980 quando scrissi un programma che si chiamava Enquire: io ero un giovane fisico e lavoravo al Cern di Ginevra. Quel programma mi serviva a tenere traccia del complesso di relazioni fra persone, idee, progetti e computer di quella straordinaria comunità di scienziati. Era solo ad uso personale. Poi nel 1989 scrissi un memo ai miei capi, un memo storico anche se allora non potevo saperlo. Proponevo di creare uno spazio comune dove mettere le informazioni a disposizione di tutti: lo chiamai il Web. L'idea era avere una rete dove chiunque potesse facilmente avere accesso a qualunque informazione, e dove aggiungere informazioni fosse altrettanto facile. Nel 1991 già funzionava fra gli scienziati e ho iniziato a diffonderla nel resto del mondo. Sono passati vent'anni esatti e posso dire che abbiamo avuto un certo successo...". Tim Berners Lee ha 56 anni, è nato a Londra ma ormai da tempo vive e insegna al MIT di Boston; ha vinto il Millennium Prize, è considerato una delle 100 persone più importanti del secolo scorso e la regina Elisabetta II lo ha nominato cavaliere nel 2004. Per questo è diventato "sir". Ma il titolo più importante glielo ha dato la Storia, con la maiuscola: è il creatore del World wide web. Stenta a credere che per molti Internet e il Web siano sinonimi. "Qualche giorno fa in Polonia stavo cercando di spiegare ai traduttori la differenza fra Internet e il Web. Visto che non ci riuscivo, ho chiesto: come spiegate il periodo che passa fra l'invenzione di Internet, 40 anni fa, e quella del Web, 20 anni dopo? E loro mi hanno risposto: 40 anni fa avevamo il comunismo e quindi per noi i due concetti sono sinonimi. In Italia la sapete la differenza?". Per parlare del futuro di Internet, della necessità che tutti abbiano accesso alla rete e per soffiare sulle prime venti candeline del www, sir Tim oggi è a Roma dove aprirà una conferenza a lui dedicata: "happybirthday web". *Wikipedia indica nel 6 agosto 1991 la nascita del Web, ovvero la messa in rete del primo sito: info. cern.ch. È una data speciale che dobbiamo trasmettere ai nostri figli? Avete in qualche modo festeggiato?* "A dire il vero non molto. Il 6 agosto 1991 ho solo mandato un messaggio al newsgroup alt.hypertext per far conoscere il Web al resto del mondo. Ma era già disponibile all'interno della comunità del Cern. Per me già esisteva". [...] Continua qui: http://www.repubblica.it/tecnologia/2011/11/14/news/intervista_berners_lee-…

2 1

Agcom lettera UE
by Blengino Nov. 14, 2011

Nov. 14, 2011

Qui finalmente la lettera (come sempre grazie a Guido ) http://www.leggioggi.it/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Lettera-ue-a-agcom.pdf L'ho solo scorsa... ma mi pare che le richieste di chiarimenti tocchino molti dei punti sollevati dal Centro Nexa: il problema dei destinatari, dei titolari legittimati, delle eccezioni, dei tempi e della discrezionalità... Insomma i problemi che noi abbiamo segnalato ci sono tutti nelle richieste della UE che non mi paiono affatto blande.

5 9

Sondaggio
by athos gualazzi Nov. 13, 2011

Nov. 13, 2011

Abbiamo aperto un sondaggio su: "Il Partito Pirata deve occuparsi prevalentemente della Rete?" <http://www.partito-pirata.it> grazie per il vostro contributo Athos -- Athos Gualazzi presidente Associazione Partito Pirata http://www.partito-pirata.it http://www.piratpartiet.it http://www.anonet.it

1 0

Se Facebook ci ripensa e si converte all'opt-in
by MANTELERO ALESSANDRO Nov. 12, 2011

Nov. 12, 2011

http://goo.gl/anHyT Avv. Alessandro Mantelero, PhD Confirmed Assistant Professor http://staff.polito.it/alessandro.mantelero Department of Production Systems and Business Economics Politecnico di Torino Corso Duca degli Abruzzi, 24 10129 Torino - Italy

1 0

Intervista a John Clancy su ACTA
by fabio chiusi Nov. 12, 2011

Nov. 12, 2011

Ho tradotto il video di LQDN (ci sono anche i sottotitoli in italiano nel video, così può circolare meglio) e fatto qualche domanda al portavoce UE per il Commercio John Clancy su ACTA. Qui le sue risposte: http://www.valigiablu.it/doc/607/accordi-segreti-con-le-multinazionali-mina… Vi convincono? Buon w/e Fabio Chiusi

1 0

Paper: "Network Operators and Content Providers: Who Bears the Cost?"
by J.C. DE MARTIN Nov. 11, 2011

Nov. 11, 2011

Network Operators and Content Providers: Who Bears the Cost? J. Scott Marcus <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=333755> Wissenschaftliches Institut für Infrastruktur und Kommunikationsdienste (WIK) September 13, 2011 *Abstract: * A number of network operators have recently claimed (1) that their costs are exploding due to increased Internet broadband traffic associated with video; (2) that, due to market defects, consumers need not and do not pay the increased costs of the broadband service; and (3) that it may therefore become necessary for content providers to subsidise the cost of the consumer's Internet service - especially as networks evolve to fibre-based Next Generation Access (NGA). Under close scrutiny, none of these claims is persuasive. (1) Internet traffic is indeed increasing, but usage-based cost per subscriber in the fixed network is fairly constant - technological improvements are in balance with the growth in traffic (which is in fact considerably less, in percentage terms, than it was in past years). (2) Prices for fixed broadband service are stable because costs are stable - this is a success of the competitive market, not a failure. In those instances where costs truly are increasing, network operators seem to be able to raise prices accordingly. (3) The argument for cross-subsidies rests on the theory of two-sided markets, but that theory does not necessarily imply that subsidies should be flowing from content providers to network operators. If the greatest challenge to NGA migration is that the incremental willingness of consumers to pay for ultra-fast broadband is insufficient to fund the corresponding network upgrades, then what is apparently needed is more high value high bandwidth content. One could just as well argue that subsidies should flow into the content provision industry as out of it - a detailed examination would be needed. *Number of Pages in PDF File:* 85 *Keywords:* Internet, content provider, network operator, two-sided market *JEL Classifications:* H54, L51, L86, L91 Working Paper Series http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1926768

2 1

US Senate Votes to Uphold FCC Net Neutrality Rules
by Paolo Brini Nov. 10, 2011

Nov. 10, 2011

Bocciata la risoluzione di "disapproval" sulle norme e la competenza di FCC. Free Press Action Fund is pleased that the Senate sided with Internet users in halting "resolution of disapproval" FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Date: November 10, 2011 Contact: Jenn Ettinger, 202-265-1490 x 35 WASHINGTON -- On Thursday, the Senate rejected a motion to proceed on its "resolution of disapproval" of the Federal Communications Commission’s Net Neutrality rules. The resolution failed by a margin of 52 - 46. The measure was an effort by Senate Republicans to reverse the FCC’s December 2010 rules intended to prevent Internet service providers from blocking or discriminating against content and applications on the Web. <http://www.freepress.net/press-release/2011/11/10/senate-votes-uphold-fcc-n…> Ciao, Paolo

1 0