- nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Oral question in EP on the Italian audiovisual authorization decree
by Philippe Aigrain March 8, 2010

March 8, 2010

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+OQ+O-2010-… ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE pursuant to Rule 115 of the Rules of Procedure by Sonia Alfano, Alexander Alvaro, Ivo Vajgl, Marietje Schaake, Sophia in 't Veld and Niccolò Rinaldi, on behalf of the ALDE Group to the Commission dates from 10 February 2010. Anybody knows when it will be asked and answered? Philippe Subject: Conformity of the draft Italian decree implementing Directive 2007/65/EC with the Directive and with fundamental rights The Italian Government has issued the scheme for a legislative decree No 169(1) implementing Directive 2007/65/EC(2) on media broadcasting services. The proposal, if approved, would impose on websites such as Google or blogs that contain audio-video files the obligation to obtain a governmental authorisation for the broadcasting of media content (such as live streaming and web casting, as provided by Article 17 letter cc of the decree amending Article 21 of the Consolidated Text on media). Stakeholders, NGOs and citizens have expressed criticism of the decree, while the President of the Italian authority for communications has affirmed that ‘a generalised filter on internet is on one side restrictive - in a way that no other western European country has ever accepted to do, while on the other inefficient - since it is an a priori bureaucratic filter’. He has also stated that such an authorisation provision ‘is outside of the framework of the Directive and this would make it incompatible with European law: as such, it could raise questions for the Commission that would undoubtedly express criticism of it’. Does the Commission not believe that such provisions are not envisaged in any way by the Directive? Does it not believe that they could put at risk freedom of expression and of information, as guaranteed by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and by Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, notably by attributing to the government a power of censure that is contrary to human rights, fundamental freedoms, democracy and the rule of law, guaranteed by Articles 2 and 6 TEU? Does any other EU Member State or third State have similar provisions and if so, which States? How does the Commission envisage ensuring the protection of fundamental rights in Europe’s Digital Agenda?

2 1

documentazione su caso Google-Vividown
by J.C. DE MARTIN March 8, 2010

March 8, 2010

Considerata l'incredibile quantita' di imprecisioni e di sciocchezze fattuali dette e scritte sul caso Google-Vividown, segnalo queste URL preziose: http://gilioli.blogautore.espresso.repubblica.it/2010/02/26/bullismo-su-goo… http://espresso.repubblica.it/multimedia/home/23309734 http://espresso.repubblica.it/dettaglio/caso-google-come-andata/2121920 juan carlos

12 19

18° Mercoledì di NEXA: MERCOLEDì, ore 18, corso Trento 21 - Torino
by Anna Piccitto March 8, 2010

March 8, 2010

1 0

BBC poll: Internet access 'a human right'
by J.C. DE MARTIN March 8, 2010

March 8, 2010

From the BBC Web site: Internet access 'a human right' Almost four in five people worldwide see internet access as a fundamental right, a poll for the BBC World Service suggests. http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/2/hi/technology/8548190.stm juan carlos (via IRP list)

3 2

Guardian: "Lords copyright change 'could block YouTube'"
by J.C. DE MARTIN March 5, 2010

March 5, 2010

Lords copyright change 'could block YouTube' * Bobbie Johnson <http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/bobbiejohnson>, technology correspondent * guardian.co.uk <http://www.guardian.co.uk/>, Thursday 4 March 2010 07.00 GMT Lord Mandelson's plans to tackle illegal filesharing have received widespread criticism Photograph: Andrew Winning/Reuters One of the most contentious parts of the controversial digital economy bill was voted down by the House of Lords last night -- only to be replaced by a clause that campaigners say is even more draconian. The Liberal Democrats forced through a surprise amendment to the bill's notorious clause 17 on Wednesday -- in a move that dealt a defeat to the government but troubled critics, who suggest it will have the opposite effect that its creators intend. Instead of sweeping new powers that threatened sweeping alterations to British copyright law <http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/dec/02/digital-economy-bill-googl…>, the Lib Dems added a clause that gives extra oversight to the high court. The new proposal -- which was passed in the House of Lords by 165 votes to 140 -- gives a high court judge the right to issue an injunction against a website accused of hosting a "substantial" amount of copyright infringing material, potentially forcing the entire site offline. Continua qui: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/mar/04/lords-digital-economy-bill jc

1 0

Publishing: The Revolutionary Future - The New York Review of Books
by vale.it＠gmail.com March 4, 2010

March 4, 2010

Un interessante articolo sul futuro dell'editoria. V http://www.nybooks.com/articles/23683 @article{Epstein:2010, Author = {Jason Epstein}, Date-Added = {2010-03-04 09:04:28 +0100}, Date-Modified = {2010-03-04 09:07:29 +0100}, Journal = {New York Review of Books}, Keywords = {diritto d'autore; copyright; costi di distribuzione; creative commons; creativit{\`a}; informatica giuridica}, Month = {March}, Number = {4}, Title = {Publishing: The Revolutionary Future}, Url = {http://www.nybooks.com/articles/23683}, Volume = {57}, Year = {2010}}

1 0

Fwd: [IP] Lessig presentation silenced (again)
by J.C. DE MARTIN March 2, 2010

March 2, 2010

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [IP] Lessig presentation silenced (again) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 13:44:48 -0500 From: David Farber <dave(a)farber.net> Reply-To: dave(a)farber.net To: ip <ip(a)v2.listbox.com> Begin forwarded message: From: Richard Forno<rforno(a)infowarrior.org> Date: March 2, 2010 12:55:03 PM EST To: Undisclosed-recipients:<>; Cc: Dave Farber<dave(a)farber.net> Subject: Lessig presentation silenced (again) Bogus Copyright Claim Silences Yet Another Larry Lessig YouTube Presentation from the not-this-again... dept http://techdirt.com/articles/20100302/0354498358.shtml Nearly a year ago, we wrote about how a YouTube presentation done by well known law professor (and strong believer in fair use and fixing copyright law), Larry Lessig, had been taken down, because his video, in explaining copyright and fair use and other such things, used a snippet of a Warner Music song to demonstrate a point. There could be no clearer example of fair use -- but the video was still taken down. There was some dispute at the time as to whether or not this was an actual DMCA takedown, or merely YouTube's audio/video fingerprinting technology (which the entertainment industry insists can understand fair use and not block it). But, in the end, does it really make a difference? A takedown over copyright is a takedown over copyright. Amazingly enough, it appears that almost the exact same thing has happened again. A video of one of Lessig's presentations, that he just posted -- a "chat" he had done for the OpenVideoAlliance a week or so ago, about open culture and fair use, has received notice that it has been silenced. It hasn't been taken down entirely -- but the entire audio track from the 42 minute video is completely gone. All of it. In the comments, some say there's a notification somewhere that the audio has been disabled because of "an audio track that has not been authorized by WMG" (Warner Music Group) -- which would be the same company whose copyright caused the issue a year ago -- but I haven't seen or heard that particular message anywhere. However, Lessig is now required to fill out a counternotice challenging the takedown -- while silencing his video in the meantime: While you can still see the video on YouTube, without the audio, it's pretty much worthless. Thankfully, the actual video is available elsewhere, where you can both hear and see it. But, really, the fact that Lessig has had two separate videos -- both of which clearly are fair use -- neutered due to bogus copyright infringement risks suggests a serious problem. I'm guessing that, once again, this video was likely caught by the fingerprinting, rather than a direct claim by Warner Music. In fact, the issue may be the identical one, as I believe the problem last year was the muppets theme, which very, very briefly appears in this video (again) as an example of fair use in action. But it was Warner Music and others like it that demanded Google put such a fingerprinting tool in place (and such companies are still talking about requiring such tools under the law). And yet, this seems to show just how problematic such rules are. Even worse, this highlights just how amazingly problematic things get when you put secondary liability on companies like Google. Under such a regime, Google would of course disable such a video, to avoid its own liability. The idea that Google can easily tell what is infringing and what is not is proven ridiculous when something like this is pulled off-line (or just silenced). When a video about fair use itself is pulled down for a bogus copyright infringement, it proves the point. The unintended consequences of asking tool providers to judge what is and what is not copyright infringement lead to tremendous problems with companies shooting first and asking questions later. They are silencing speech, on the threat that it might infringe on copyright. This is backwards. We live in a country that is supposed to cherish free speech, not stifle it in case it harms the business model of a company. We live in a country that is supposed to encourage the free expression of ideas -- not lock it up and take it down because one company doesn't know how to adapt its business model. We should never be silencing videos because they might infringe on copyright. Situations like this demonstrate the dangerous unintended consequences of secondary liability. At least with Lessig, you have someone who knows what happened, and knows how to file a counternotice -- though, who knows how long it will take for this situation to be corrected. But for many, many, many other people, they are simply silenced. Silenced because of industry efforts to turn copyright law into something it was never intended to be: a tool to silence the wider audience in favor of a few large companies. The system is broken. When even the calls to fix the system are silenced by copyright claims, isn't it time that we fixed the system? ------------------------------------------- Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

2 1

[NEXA]Pronuncia tedesca in tema di data retention.
by vale.it＠gmail.com March 2, 2010

March 2, 2010

http://ktar.com/?nid=49&sid=1269407

1 0

Fwd: [Air-L] Italian Conference on Free Software - call for participation
by Andrea Calderaro March 2, 2010

March 2, 2010

Ciao a tutt* credo che questa non sia ancora passata in lista. Inizio messaggio inoltrato: > Da: Stefano De Paoli > Oggetto: [Air-L] Italian Conference on Free Software - call for participation > > The main goal of The Italian Conference on Free Software is to > consider the state of the art of Free Software in Italy. > > This is the 4th edition of the Conference, that was first held in > Cosenza in 2007, in Trento in 2008 and in Bologna 2009 . Coherently > with the previous edition, the focus of the Conference is on the > involvement and coming together of people actively interested in > research about Free Software, in Free Software development, and in the > promotion and spread of Free Software. All the thematic areas related > to Free Software are considered relevant, ranging from economic > aspects to legal, from technical to ethical, social and philosophical > subjects. > > The Conference will be held on 11 and 12 June 2010, in Cagliari, Sardinia > http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=cagliari+sardin… > > Different types of sessions and events are planned, in order to have > enterprises, public organizations, universities, research centers, > developers and citizens meet each other and start working together. > > See the conference Website with Call for Papers and Participation (in Italian) > http://www.confsl.org/confsl10/index.php/call-for-papers > > > Please circulate this email to interested people and colleagues. > > > > -- > My institutional page > http://www.nuim.ie/nirsa/people/postdocs/stefano_de_paoli.shtml > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ _________________________________ Andrea Calderaro Department of Social and Political Sciences European University Institute Italy ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- PERSONAL PAGE: http://www.eui.eu/Personal/Researchers/calderaro CV: http://www.eui.eu/Personal/Researchers/calderaro/CalderaroCV.pdf Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.

1 0

Fw: La LUISS adotta una politica istituzionale Open Access
by Mariella Berra March 1, 2010

March 1, 2010

----- Original Message ----- From: "Oriana Bozzarelli" <oriana.bozzarelli(a)unito.it> To: <arnaldo.bagnasco(a)unito.it> Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2010 10:02 AM Subject: La LUISS adotta una politica istituzionale Open Access > Vi segnalo una notizia, a mio parere, importante: > > La LUISS, Libera Università Internazionale degli Studi > Sociali Guido Carli, con delibera del Senato Accademico, > ha adottato una politica istituzionale mandataria per il > deposito dei metadati bibliografici e delle copie > elettroniche di tutti i lavori scientifici prodotti dai > docenti dell'Ateneo nell'Archivio aperto istituzionale, > LUISSearch. > > La policy adottata si riconduce al modello ID/OA > (Immediate Deposit/Optional Access), anche noto come Dual > Deposit/Release Strategy, che prevede il deposito > immediato delle pubblicazioni accettate dagli editori, > corredate dai metadati bibliografici, che saranno resi > immediatamente disponibili ad accesso aperto. La > disponibilità dei testi integrali ad accesso aperto sarà > immediata o soggetta ad un periodo di embargo in accordo > con le politiche editoriali. > > La policy prevede tuttavia un altro passaggio che può > costituire un precedente importante nella necessaria > integrazione degli Archivi Aperti istituzionali nelle > procedure di deposito dei prodotti scientifici soggetti a > valutazione della ricerca. La LUISS ha stabilito infatti > che, a conclusione di un periodo di transizione di dodici > mesi, "l'Archivio istituzionale diventerà il principale > strumento e punto di accesso per l'attività di valutazione > del personale docente e di assegnazione di risorse > finanziarie ai progetti di ricerca portati avanti > all'interno dell'Ateneo ed esclusivamente i documenti > depositati in LUISSearch andranno a costituire la lista > ufficiale delle pubblicazioni correlate al curriculum di > ciascun docente. > > La politica adottata dalla LUISS sembra quindi andare > nella direzione suggerita dalle Raccomandazioni su L'Open > Access e la valutazione dei prodotti della ricerca > scientifica del gruppo OA della Commissione Biblioteche > della CRUI e già intrapresa altrove, come dimostrano gli > esempi britannico, australiano e spagnolo. > > Per prendere visione del testo si vada alla URL: > http://eprints.luiss.it/Policy-LUISS-2010.pdf > > Cordialmente > > > Dott.ssa Oriana BOZZARELLI > ---------------------------------------------------- > Catalogazione libro antico a stampa > Risorse elettroniche > Sito web > > Biblioteca Interdipartimentale Gioele Solari > Università degli Studi di Torino > via Sant'Ottavio, 20 > 10124 Torino > http://library.unito.it/solari-tabacco/index.php > > tel. 011.6703287 > fax 011.6703258 > email: oriana.bozzarelli(a)unito.it > > >

1 0