Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Brilliant case
I have just read the case of Emerald Garment Manufacturing v. CA for the nth time and everytime I just say: "brilliant!" It said it applied the dominancy and holistic test yet in another breath it said that it must not look at the trademark by piecemeal. I mean come on.. Stylistic Mr. Lee and Lee is not confusingly similar. The former could even be considered as a special product of the latter. Come on. Now, any comments?
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
A billion dollar law suit: IP rights v. Marketing opportunity
Viacom recently sued Google and YouTube for copyright infringment, the first big lawsuit against the online video site and the company that owns it. Viacom, the owner of two popular stations MTV and Comedy Central, claims that unauthorized clips of Viacom have been viewable on YouTube and they have been viewed many times.
Unlike the move that has been made by other media companies such as GE- which owns NBC, and CBS where they were able to settle an agreement with Google and YouTube and made them their partners, Viacom decided to sue.
The move of those who partnered with YouTube is based on the gain from the increased exposure of the shows which clips are available on the website. Some media companies sees the posting of videoclips as an opportunity to advertise their show to millions and millions of viewers, mostly young people. On the other hand, Viacom's move is presented by them as a stand to protect their right. I believe that they did that because they weren't able to get a deal they want from Google.
It is true that Viacom has a right to protect its products and has a cause of action against Google, however there are times when a person would gain more from a bad compromise agreement as compared to a glorious victory from the court. I believe that this is one of the cases where this idea applies. Why? Because 1) Viacom fails to see the great opportunity it could get from joining, instead of going against, YouTube such as multplied advertising and exposure 2)like BBC, Viacom can circumvent its problem by instead opening channels on YouTube 3) also like BBC, it could instead strike a deal with YouTube to get a share of the advertising revenue generate by the traffic to the channels it may set up - but then again maybe Viacom wants more which is why they sued.
Unlike the move that has been made by other media companies such as GE- which owns NBC, and CBS where they were able to settle an agreement with Google and YouTube and made them their partners, Viacom decided to sue.
The move of those who partnered with YouTube is based on the gain from the increased exposure of the shows which clips are available on the website. Some media companies sees the posting of videoclips as an opportunity to advertise their show to millions and millions of viewers, mostly young people. On the other hand, Viacom's move is presented by them as a stand to protect their right. I believe that they did that because they weren't able to get a deal they want from Google.
It is true that Viacom has a right to protect its products and has a cause of action against Google, however there are times when a person would gain more from a bad compromise agreement as compared to a glorious victory from the court. I believe that this is one of the cases where this idea applies. Why? Because 1) Viacom fails to see the great opportunity it could get from joining, instead of going against, YouTube such as multplied advertising and exposure 2)like BBC, Viacom can circumvent its problem by instead opening channels on YouTube 3) also like BBC, it could instead strike a deal with YouTube to get a share of the advertising revenue generate by the traffic to the channels it may set up - but then again maybe Viacom wants more which is why they sued.
Monday, February 26, 2007
Growing structure and divide
Again, technology is the knowledge and skill in usage of crafts in everyday life. It creates a multiplier effect in terms of the efficiency of labor or capital. Hence, it may also create a multiplier effect on the difference in efficiency or capability between persons who have the latest technology as compared to those who do not have.
The current digital era has created a divide between people who have and those who have not. The effect is not just in terms of economics (employment, costs, etc) but also in some other aspects. For example, a person who does not have access to the internet do not have the social networking advantage that other people do. Also, those who do not have do not have much voice as compared to those who are up to date by the minute with the news, government's actions, and even in participation in the decision making of the government through expression of opinions online. This divide has widen the already existing poverty gap within nations and even throughout nations. The Philippines do not have as much law with regard to this technology as compared to US, Japan, etc., because we, Filipinos as a whole, are not that familiar with it.
SO the question is how should the government respond to this? There is the one laptop per child project of red hat which would costs the Philippines billion of pesos and there are also some other alternatives.
So what are the alternatives? The first point, I think, that the government should take into account is which effect of the digital divide is pressing? Is it the technical aspect or the computer literacy of the working population - main issue is employment, is it the social aspect, or should the government look into the more long term solution by starting with the young ones. If it is the first one then the government should focus more on training the workforce or retraining those people who got unemployed. If it is the social aspect then the government would just have to encourage the sprouting of internet cafes where access is getting cheaper and cheaper. But if the government should take the long term solution, then the child should not just be taught how to use the technology in their school but should also have access to a computer in the house- which would entail a heavy fiscal punishment to our government. There could be other substitutes like the project where computers with internet access are given to certain barangays where the issue then would be the time of access, the fairness of allocation of time, and transportation to that place.
The invention that was created by man to make life better has ironically caused inequality. This inequality could not be solved by the markets alone because in the first place, the market has already created the initial inequality. Lawmakers must address this issue for this will determine of how will we fare as a nation in the upcoming years.
The current digital era has created a divide between people who have and those who have not. The effect is not just in terms of economics (employment, costs, etc) but also in some other aspects. For example, a person who does not have access to the internet do not have the social networking advantage that other people do. Also, those who do not have do not have much voice as compared to those who are up to date by the minute with the news, government's actions, and even in participation in the decision making of the government through expression of opinions online. This divide has widen the already existing poverty gap within nations and even throughout nations. The Philippines do not have as much law with regard to this technology as compared to US, Japan, etc., because we, Filipinos as a whole, are not that familiar with it.
SO the question is how should the government respond to this? There is the one laptop per child project of red hat which would costs the Philippines billion of pesos and there are also some other alternatives.
So what are the alternatives? The first point, I think, that the government should take into account is which effect of the digital divide is pressing? Is it the technical aspect or the computer literacy of the working population - main issue is employment, is it the social aspect, or should the government look into the more long term solution by starting with the young ones. If it is the first one then the government should focus more on training the workforce or retraining those people who got unemployed. If it is the social aspect then the government would just have to encourage the sprouting of internet cafes where access is getting cheaper and cheaper. But if the government should take the long term solution, then the child should not just be taught how to use the technology in their school but should also have access to a computer in the house- which would entail a heavy fiscal punishment to our government. There could be other substitutes like the project where computers with internet access are given to certain barangays where the issue then would be the time of access, the fairness of allocation of time, and transportation to that place.
The invention that was created by man to make life better has ironically caused inequality. This inequality could not be solved by the markets alone because in the first place, the market has already created the initial inequality. Lawmakers must address this issue for this will determine of how will we fare as a nation in the upcoming years.
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
A case of online torts
In a case in US District Court titled Doe v. MySpace, a minor girl aged 13 signed up in MySpace representing herself as 18 - it must be noted here that according to the terms and policy of MySpace a person under 14yrs of age are not allowed to avail of their services-, signed up. She then met a 19 year old man whom she then talked with on the phone and then allegedly assaulted her.
The plaintiffs in that case, the minor and her mother, claimed that MySpace failed to take adequate precautions to protect the minor from getting assaulted. On the other hand, MySpace based its defense on Section 230 of the US Communications Decency Act which in quote states that:
"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."
The Court therein dismissed the case holding that MySpace is immune from the cause of action of the plaintiff based on the said statute as interpreted in the case of Zeran v. AOL. The Court also stated that MySpace has no legal duty to protect its users from criminal acts of a third person or control the conduct of another. Furthermore, it implied that to require MySpace to confirm or determine the age of each applicant would entail a heavy burden on MySpace and this is what the said statute protects publishers of a third party content from.
If this case happened in the Philippine setting, would the court exempt MySpace from the suit. If it was indeed established that the girl was assaulted by the man and that the contact between them was done through MySpace, would the still dismiss the case? I believe that if the Court would rule in favor of MySpace, it would be on the basis of the concept of proximate cause. This is because our law punishes the publisher as can be seen in the Revised Penal Code. I believe that this is a better way of ruling over the case because exempting a publisher from torts because the work or article that is libelous was made by a third party leaves victims with no recourse against anyone if the third party is unanimous. This exemption might also lead to dubious decisions such as in the case of Michelangelo Delfino v. Agilent Technologies where a California Appellate Court held the defendant-employer to be an ISP and hence immune from a tort arising the wrongful actions of an employee by using that access.
The plaintiffs in that case, the minor and her mother, claimed that MySpace failed to take adequate precautions to protect the minor from getting assaulted. On the other hand, MySpace based its defense on Section 230 of the US Communications Decency Act which in quote states that:
"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."
The Court therein dismissed the case holding that MySpace is immune from the cause of action of the plaintiff based on the said statute as interpreted in the case of Zeran v. AOL. The Court also stated that MySpace has no legal duty to protect its users from criminal acts of a third person or control the conduct of another. Furthermore, it implied that to require MySpace to confirm or determine the age of each applicant would entail a heavy burden on MySpace and this is what the said statute protects publishers of a third party content from.
If this case happened in the Philippine setting, would the court exempt MySpace from the suit. If it was indeed established that the girl was assaulted by the man and that the contact between them was done through MySpace, would the still dismiss the case? I believe that if the Court would rule in favor of MySpace, it would be on the basis of the concept of proximate cause. This is because our law punishes the publisher as can be seen in the Revised Penal Code. I believe that this is a better way of ruling over the case because exempting a publisher from torts because the work or article that is libelous was made by a third party leaves victims with no recourse against anyone if the third party is unanimous. This exemption might also lead to dubious decisions such as in the case of Michelangelo Delfino v. Agilent Technologies where a California Appellate Court held the defendant-employer to be an ISP and hence immune from a tort arising the wrongful actions of an employee by using that access.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Next level of mobile networking
In an article made by CNN, it was said that techies in Barcelona are trying to device a way of making the mobile phone the next screen for surfing the Web.
The passion for connectivity has dramatically increased since the time the Internet became accessible for many people. People from all over the world were empowered to communicate with each other in a cheaper way through chatting. Then user generated content comes in ie blogs, music, and videos in youtube, etc. So what if all of these can be made or accessed through mobile phones?
Though the thought seems to be exciting, businessmen and tech people would have to go through some obstacles such as the mobile phone's hardware and software, websites that are phone friendly, and the price that the networks charge its users for such service. Nonetheless, the possibility for such thing to happen does not look so far as the technology for its realization are already there. Some websites offer services that are phone-friendly, there are mobile phones that are capable of surfing the net, and the 3G technology makes it possible to happen. The only problem left is the behavior of network operators.
So, what should be the position of the Government? I say let the "invisible hand" work with a sprinkle of "Keynesian" attitude. Let the consumers demand, the industry supply, and the government regulate to keep the competition fair for all.
The passion for connectivity has dramatically increased since the time the Internet became accessible for many people. People from all over the world were empowered to communicate with each other in a cheaper way through chatting. Then user generated content comes in ie blogs, music, and videos in youtube, etc. So what if all of these can be made or accessed through mobile phones?
Though the thought seems to be exciting, businessmen and tech people would have to go through some obstacles such as the mobile phone's hardware and software, websites that are phone friendly, and the price that the networks charge its users for such service. Nonetheless, the possibility for such thing to happen does not look so far as the technology for its realization are already there. Some websites offer services that are phone-friendly, there are mobile phones that are capable of surfing the net, and the 3G technology makes it possible to happen. The only problem left is the behavior of network operators.
So, what should be the position of the Government? I say let the "invisible hand" work with a sprinkle of "Keynesian" attitude. Let the consumers demand, the industry supply, and the government regulate to keep the competition fair for all.
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Blogging
Blogging has become a phenomenon. Some are personal and some are non-personal. Personal blogs are like diaries while non-personal are leaning more on journal writing.
Today, its use have become wider. Political parties in other countries are using it to connect with their constituents, it has even become a source of news.
I have received a message in my other blog from the Singapore Internet Research Center who's currently making a study regarding Ethics in Blogging Report. Let's help this study in order for us to learn more about this phenomenon. Ayt. Fill in the survey form at http://www.questionpro.com/akira/TakeSurvey?id=591306
Today, its use have become wider. Political parties in other countries are using it to connect with their constituents, it has even become a source of news.
I have received a message in my other blog from the Singapore Internet Research Center who's currently making a study regarding Ethics in Blogging Report. Let's help this study in order for us to learn more about this phenomenon. Ayt. Fill in the survey form at http://www.questionpro.com/akira/TakeSurvey?id=591306
Monday, January 29, 2007
Knowledge is power
Knowledge transfer has been the reason for the progress we've been having given the limited time we have on earth. First it was through verbal tradition, then through paper, and now through digital technology.
However, there are some information that, as some people would say, dangerous. Learning about music theory, computer technology, etc surely would not produce any negative externalities to the world community - but it would actually create positive effects, but would information about how to pick locks and the like help our community progress.
In London, some people asked the removal of videos on YouTube that shows how to pick locks. It was said in an internet article that there has been cases where there has been a burglary but there were no signs of forced entry which made police conclude that a key was used. The article infers that the sprout of these type of videos might be one of the reasons.
True enough, if you try to search YouTube for lock picking videos, the return would show about 400 videos. However, If you read the comments section, it seems like lock picking is only a hobby for these people. Moreover, these videos could also produce some benefit to householders since they are given the means of evaluate the security measures they have taken for their homes, just like how the bugs and the viruses (etc) that plagues our computers produce the countermeasures that programmers are forced to make out of necessity.
Then again, not all of the effects of unrestricted information can be countered as long as there are irresponsible people lurking out there. The least that we should ask for is some restriction mechanism that webmasters should create in order to at least filter out persons who would most likely be irresponsible.
However, there are some information that, as some people would say, dangerous. Learning about music theory, computer technology, etc surely would not produce any negative externalities to the world community - but it would actually create positive effects, but would information about how to pick locks and the like help our community progress.
In London, some people asked the removal of videos on YouTube that shows how to pick locks. It was said in an internet article that there has been cases where there has been a burglary but there were no signs of forced entry which made police conclude that a key was used. The article infers that the sprout of these type of videos might be one of the reasons.
True enough, if you try to search YouTube for lock picking videos, the return would show about 400 videos. However, If you read the comments section, it seems like lock picking is only a hobby for these people. Moreover, these videos could also produce some benefit to householders since they are given the means of evaluate the security measures they have taken for their homes, just like how the bugs and the viruses (etc) that plagues our computers produce the countermeasures that programmers are forced to make out of necessity.
Then again, not all of the effects of unrestricted information can be countered as long as there are irresponsible people lurking out there. The least that we should ask for is some restriction mechanism that webmasters should create in order to at least filter out persons who would most likely be irresponsible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
