Archive | June, 2005

G8 Radio: Webcast and Broadcast

G8 Radio will be providing streaming audio coverage of protests against the G8 in Scotland this weekend, in addition to related reportage and analysis.

The venerable Amsterdam unlicensed station Vrije Keyser Radio will be carrying the broadcast at 89.6 FM. In their announcement they write:

Amsterdam based independent free radio station ‘Radio de Vrije Keyser’ was founded in 1979 by the squatters scene.

The past two years, repression by the Dutch authorities towards free radio’s in the Netherlands has grown dramatically. After being tolerated by the authorities since the early eighties, also Vrije Keyser Radio recently got threathened by the police that they would take actions if the transmitter was not turned off permanently. But Vrije Keyser Radio goes on!

These days, Vrije Keyser Radio is only on air during special occasions, like certain festivals, demonstrations and other protests.

Temporary, hit-and-run, and event-based broadcasts can be very effective ways of using unlicensed radio strategically to bring much-needed info to the airwaves while minimizing the risk of being busted.

According to G8Radio, these other broadcast and web stations will also be carrying the feed:

Continue Reading

The Pragmatics of the Grokster Decision

Matt at Machination.org tries on some clear thinking about the Supreme Court decision in the MGM vs. Grokster case:

From what I can tell, this is a fairly narrow decision with nuance. The Supreme Court seems to have ruled that a company cannot promote an illegal use for a technology. Those same kids writing lean little p2p applications for assignments will create on their own. If they go ahead and say “hey, use this to steal,” then they risk feeling that ominous chill of the man breathing down their neck (or is that “the heat?”). If an entity does is, then it can be held accountable for such use, says the court. This is not the same as saying that if a technology is misused or has an illegal use that then the entity that produced is liable, and I think the line is pretty clear.

I think he’s on the right track. While it would be nice to have a clear umbrella decision like the Betamax one, very few Supreme Court rulings are ever that clear. And this one does not say that Grokster is guilty, just that the case may proceed to determine if it is.

Of course, this is the problem with the law, in general. While the Supreme Court is the court most likely to run on clearer principle, it’s still hemmed in by the constitution as interpreted, the laws and written, and custom.

While on the surface Court rulings seem to disallow particular behaviors and actions, they also frequently provide clear instructions on how to avoid breaking the law while achieving similar goals.

Following Matt’s logic, it could be just a matter of the developers behind a P2P technology to be very careful in how they promote and market their tech.

Keep in mind that this case goes after a particular for-profit company, which is trying profit off this technology. Things do change when the tech is developed by volunteers, especially if they’re anonymous and/or from outside the US, especially if the marketing issue is the most defining.

I’m not cheering this decision, but I think it’s important to recognize that we’re all stuck in a pragmatic compromise of having to thrash through thousands of screwed up laws everyday, and somehow most of us figure a way to cut through the maze.

Continue Reading

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes