-
Recent Posts
- Research in Motion’s Opportunity to Promulgate Freedom
- Bill C-32: The Latest Attempt to Amend the Copyright Act
- Interpreting the NHL and the disallowed Sedin goal
- The Speciation of Web Sites
- Library Manifesto
- Technology (law) is everywhere!
- How to save a drowning business
- Information is the Good, the Currency, and the Era
- Opening the Scope of Employee Contribution
- On Virtual Travel
- Who carries your Web 2.0 banner?
- Laws for the Virtual Universe
- The Value of Liberal Arts in a Recession
- Richard Stallman came to Vancouver, and I upset him
- Does WOM or Social Network Marketing Create Agency?
Recent Comments
- Jeremy Costin on Research in Motion’s Opportunity to Promulgate Freedom
- Alexander Finger on Research in Motion’s Opportunity to Promulgate Freedom
- Fran on Research in Motion’s Opportunity to Promulgate Freedom
- Jeremy Costin on RIAA and MPAA hijack the border (or someone like them)
- Matthew Anderson on RIAA and MPAA hijack the border (or someone like them)
Tags
art Business C-61 Canadian DMCA Civil Liberties Communications contract copyfight copyleft copyright copyright reform DMCA ethics EULA fair use ford Info Dynamics Intelligence Information Technology Intellectual Property interration lex mercatoria licensing mercantile law MPAA net neutrality nhl nietzsche patent pop culture positive duty Privacy private copying reverse engineering RIAA shelley shysters be gone social networking software Tazzu trademark user rights Video Games virtual world Virtual Worlds web 2.0
Tag Archives: Privacy
Research in Motion’s Opportunity to Promulgate Freedom
Several countries, none of which is a finalist in the Freedom to the People sweepstakes, are considering blackballing the BlackBerry for being too secure… The better route for BlackBerry is to work with these governments to reshape their privacy policies in favour of citizen rights. Continue reading
Posted in Business, Civil Liberties, Communications
Tagged blackberry, Business, Civil Liberties, Communications, encryption, Information Technology, Privacy
3 Comments
Is there a Master Chef at Bell?
Bell claims that they have to throttle bandwidth or Internet access will be slow for everyone. Since it was only with the discovery that Bell was shuffling high-payload users into a slow lane that we found out that there were people moving along faster, it now recasts the entire argument as follows:
Bell originally marketed ultra-high speed access as a fast lane since everything was getting slow. Now we know that it was only slow for those upon whom slowness was being forced by Bell so that they could then justify the higher price of ultra-high speed (i.e. allegedly unthrottled) access. Bell claims this is necessary, as there is an imminent threat to everyone’s bandwidth. But unlike a concrete highway, bandwidth is not based on scarce real property. It is based on virtually limitless fibre-optic trunks and always-improving server technology. The physical space occupied by these bandwidth highways is minimal; the physical space required for expansion, if it is in fact necessary, is negligible. Continue reading
Of Words, and Acts, and Ministers
However, this post is not about the new copyright act directly, nor is it about consumer rights or even election promises. Rather it is about the drastic impact that a single word (or the absence thereof) can make, and the difference between what is said and what is written. Or, in other words, it is example how apparently commendable goals are implemented in dysfunctional ways.
Last week, the Vancouver Sun reported on the effect that 2003 amendments to the B.C. Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act have had on medical research in this province. Continue reading
Loading ...