A few weeks back, someone pointed me to a Twitter message where one Twitter user was (jokingly) accusing another of copyright infringement for repeating a message. While the situation was amusing, you knew it was only a matter of time until the question became more serious. Mark Cuban put up a blog post this weekend asking about the copyrightability of Twitter messages. His question revolves around whether or not it’s copyright infringement for someone like ESPN to repeat what he wrote in a Twitter message, which he would have preferred they didn’t quote.
by Elizabeth Holmes, Reporter, The Wall Street Journal
Is more always better?
Hulu has expanded its content library considerably since its launch a year ago. The Internet video site has grown from 50 content partners to more than 130 and has nearly 40,000 pieces of video.
by Marisa Taylor, Reporter, The Wall Street Journal
The Internet might be the best and cheapest way to spread an idea, but its role in furthering terrorism has been overestimated by Western governments, says a new study by the London-based International Center for the Study of Radicalization and Political Violence.
Like is the new favorite, which was, at one time, the new bookmark. This small, but important feature will reinforce relationships between friends and followers and those who produce, interact with, and share content.
by Adam Thierer and John Palfrey, Senior Fellow, Progress and Freedom Foundation; and Faculty Co-Director, Berkman Center for Internet & Society
When the Communications Decency Act was enshrined into law with the passage of the historic Telecommunications Act of 1996, it contained a number of controversial provisions that covered “obscene or indecent” online content. But at the behest of ISPs and others concerned about the potentially stifling effects of possible obscenity suits on the still-young network, the CDA also included 47 U.S.C. Sec. 230, commonly known as Section 230, which shielded “interactive computer service providers” from liability for information posted or published by users of their systems.
by Jon Healey, Editorial Writer, Los Angeles Times
During a long career as a television and technology executive, Mitch Berman has tried to sell several different iterations of TV, often in their formative stages. Now, Berman is onto the next new thing, delivering TV through the Internet.
The social Web has given users great power: the ability to create and share content with people around the world–easily and quickly. The problem, of course, is that power is often not compatible with effective and clear thinking. The thought that germinated in an instant can be immortalized in perpetuity on the Web.
On TV, content is king. But on the Web, community may reign supreme. Throughout television history, the way to lure most viewers was to air the best shows. It doesn’t necessarily work that way on the Web, where many shows can be seen on multiple sites.
One of the proverbial axioms of the “publishing world” is that sex sells. Pornography, in particular, is a massively popular business. Indeed, where porn goes, so goes technology. At least this is the oft-repeated claim. So what does it mean for the universe of print publishing when porn mags are having problems?
by Eric Savitz, Blogger and Columnist, Barron\'s, Tech Trader Daily
You know what would be cool? If you could stream Sirius (SIRI) or XM satellite radio
on your Apple (AAPL) iPhone.
As it happens, Citigroup’s Tony Wible this morning writes in a research note that there are “reports” of a new Internet streaming application that would allow SIRI users to listen on portable devices.
As major TV networks in recent years have embraced the online video movement in big ways, viewers are slowly trickling in. While you generally won’t find entire libraries and back catalogs waiting for you, the major players have made serious efforts to make current content extremely accessible online.
The advent of DSL and cable modems gave rise to a slew of popular Web services, produced multibillion-dollar companies and reshaped consumers’ daily lives–all with relatively wimpy “broadband” connections that top out at a mere 3 megabits to 6 megabits per second (Mbps). Now, two of the largest ISPs in the United States are hoping to kick off yet another broadband renaissance, this time with home connections that promise to reach 50 Mbps to 100 Mbps, enabling a slew of high-definition content, better-quality video-sharing sites and even 3-D video. Call it Broadband 2.0.
“Content is king,” many people believe, meaning that films, television shows, music, news and information are more profitable assets than the technology used to deliver them. But there’s an older, cautionary aphorism that applies as well: “Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown.” Content may be king, but, ironically, its perceived value today is being driven toward zero. In the eyes of consumers, content is becoming a commodity–more a commoner than a king.
Now that Revver has been sold to LiveUniverse, and LiveVideo has been officially launched, what’s the future for Revver’s business model? After all, it was just a few months ago that Revver revealed they’d paid $1 million to content creators since opening their doors to the public.
The race is on to get the last word in on the Comcast/BitTorrent controversy. With 10 days left to file, telcos, trade and advocacy groups are sending the Federal Communications Commission their statements on whether Comcast and other ISPs purposefully degrade peer-to-peer traffic, and if so, what to do about it. Not surprisingly, the debate pits broadband content providers and advocacy groups against the big telcos, cable companies and their trade association backers.
This is a section of the All Things Digital Web site featuring posts from around the Web, from other Dow Jones properties and also original pieces we solicit. The section is now explicitly labeled that it comes "from other Web sites."
We are fully aware of the controversies around how linking and aggregating is done on the Web and we, in no way, are attempting to "scrape" original content created by others. Instead, regarding third-party posts, we are trying to point readers of this site to other posts from around the Web that we admire and are trying to do so in the quickest manner possible.
The Internet is full of terrific content that is not ours and we want to help our readers find it by making editorial suggestions--Look, Mom, no algorithm!--of posts we think are worth their time.
That is why we have made even more changes to Voices to ensure we do this in the most transparent and timely way. While we don't expect that everyone will agree with our policies, we have made changes that reflect our intent in pointing to content outside our site.
Because the site is wholly owned by Dow Jones, publisher of The Wall Street Journal, we aim to adhere to the journalistic standards of the best of the mainstream media. But, because it is run autonomously as a small online startup, we aim to exhibit the fresh thinking and nimbleness of the best of the new media. We want to be first, and sassy, but also well sourced and accurate. We will offer lots of opinion and analysis, but plenty of fact as well.
