Dynamics
There's so much cyber-news that I'm overwhelmed and resorting to wordplay.
(The Federalist Society and the MPAA are co-sponsoring a “conference” in New Orleans in March; PFF is getting a lot of funding to work on the new Telecom Act; Section 230 protects bulletin board operators, even when they “tone down” postings.)
Word for today: dynamics. I heard it again last Friday when I listened to academic commentary about a paper comparing intellectual property to property — a questioner said something like, “Your paper doesn't capture the dynamics of this relationship.” The questioner was looking for the complex interdependencies and adaptive changes that have happened/will happen with intellectual property language. Or he/she was looking for something livelier. Whatever it was, the questioner wasn't getting it from the paper.
Last night I said it to myself (silently) because one of the people I was playing string quartets with actually had dynamic range. Yes, it has to be said, sometimes amateur chamber groups is ALL LOUD ALL THE TIME, sort of like 1010 News. But if you can actually play softly it can make a tremendous difference to the emotional impact of the music. Without dynamics it's just not that interesting.
So — notice the dynamics.
Back to our regularly scheduled programming. Boy, those guys over at the MPAA are really skilled.
Gun manufacturer liability
According to a listserv posting,
“An NPR program, Justice Talking, recently hosted a debate between Michael Barnes from the Brady Center and Richard Gardner from the NRA over the question whether manufacturers and retailers of firearms should be exposed to liability arising from unlawful use of their products.”
Link is here. Should we see parallels to the Induce/Grokster debates? Lessig op-ed along the same lines is here.