freedom of speech
CNET: Web ad blocking may not be (entirely) legal
Submitted by Bryan on September 14, 2007 - 8:19amTomorrow's legal fight may be over Web browser add-ons that let people avoid advertisements. These add-ons are growing in functionality and popularity, which has led legal experts we surveyed this week to speculate about when the first lawsuit will be filed.
If ad-blockers become so common that they slice away at publishers' revenues, "I absolutely would expect to see litigation in this area," said John Palfrey, executive director of Harvard Law School's Berkman Center for Internet and Society.
Let me give you my take on this. I have the right to decide whether I want to place advertisement on my Web pages or not. You have the right to decide whether you want to view those advertisements or your computer or not. It really should be that simple.
Opinion: Google News, Bloggers, and the Belgian courts
Submitted by Bryan on February 14, 2007 - 4:42pmA Belgian court on Tuesday ordered the search giant to refrain from showing excerpts of articles from French- and German-language Belgian newspapers on Google News and Google's Web search site for Belgium, reaffirming an earlier ruling by the same court against the company. However, in a nod to Google, the court reduced the daily fine Google faces if it fails to heed the order, from $1.3 million to $32,500.Please don't take this as legal advice, but I think this ruling is just plain silly. The fact is most bloggers and many news sites take excerpts from other articles and place it in their own article (with proper references, of course). In fact, I have to wonder since I put the above citation from CNET into this post am I now breaking Belgian law? If you're a visitor of sites such as Linux Today, NewsForge, Slashdot, Digg, and the infamous CMS Report...well according to this Belgian court you may be visiting a site that is breaking Belgian copyright law.
CNET: Lobby bill spares political bloggers
Submitted by Bryan on January 19, 2007 - 2:07pm"The Senate went on to vote 96-2 to approve the entire lobbying package, as amended, on Thursday night. The provision removed from that bill, Section 220, would have required certain people engaged in "grassroots lobbying" to register with the government or face civil and criminal penalties, including up to 10 years in prison."

Recent comments
17 hours 54 min ago
21 hours 12 min ago
1 day 8 hours ago
1 day 8 hours ago
1 day 22 hours ago
1 day 23 hours ago
2 days 18 hours ago
4 days 11 hours ago
4 days 16 hours ago
4 days 21 hours ago