Comments for IP in the Digital Age

Comment on The End of an Era: Yale’s Contributions to and Use of Open Source Software by Michael L

Michael L — Mon, 18 May 2009 01:26:09 +0000

How sad…Technology and Planning’s done a lot, it’s a shame they’re being disbanded….

Comment on Two Thoughts on Copyright Reform by Matt D

Matt D — Sun, 17 May 2009 15:37:26 +0000

Thanks very much for the clarifications! Sorry I wasn’t able to delve into your specific points in the post–my typing speed is subpar, especially while eating lunch at the same time.

I haven’t really considered the dangers of over-regulating in this space, since the reality today is so divorced from that concept. Are there any other examples of prominent copyright regimes that imposed too much of a regulatory burden?

Comment on Final Project – Reputation Economies: Identity, Status, and Property by Brian L

Brian L — Fri, 15 May 2009 17:31:03 +0000

This was really neat! It has been interesting to see how some of the reputation economies you discussed have adapted and evolved. eBay recently removed the ability of sellers to leave negative feedback for buyers since buyers could previously face negative repercussions (to their feedback score) if they gave less-than-favorable feedback to a seller, thus stifling the provision of helpful, honest feedback. In response to the trend of people selling very inexpensive digital items (like ebooks) as feedback boosters, eBay created a new category for digital items and the feedback given for such items does not contribute to one’s overall eBay feedback rating.

I also came across an article on Amazon’s review system (http://www.uie.com/articles/magicbehindamazon/z) discussing how, by asking, “Was this review helpful to you?”, Amazon is able to display the most helpful reviews first and reduce the impact of reviews that may have been written by a product’s creator/author or friend and do not accurately evaluate the product in question.

Comment on The End of an Era: Yale’s Contributions to and Use of Open Source Software by Brian L

Brian L — Fri, 15 May 2009 02:22:06 +0000

This was really well done! I found it very interesting that Yale’s open source developments first emerged out of necessity when there were not even off-the-shelf operating system available to run on the university’s equipment. Perhaps the thriving industry of higher education software has made it easier for Yale to justify its disengagement from open source projects. From your documentary, it’s pretty clear that this is a poor decision, seeing as Yale and its peer schools truly reap major benefits from being able to collaborate on things like CAS and SAKAI that are made by universities for universities with the programmers (who can make modifications relatively easily when need be) working in-house. I really hope Yale will see the light!

Comment on Final Project, the Presentation of Webcomics by Brian L

Brian L — Fri, 15 May 2009 02:08:11 +0000

Cool project, Carter. I was in another class where we discussed the existential threat facing newspapers, mostly focusing on the implications for the quality of news coverage. I had never thought about the way in which things like comics, which, as you point out, traditionally could only be lucrative if syndicated in newspapers nationwide, are threatened by the decline of the traditional media.

One question I had about your section on selling merchandise is whether you think these web comics attract a large enough audience to sell enough merchandise to remain viable?

Comment on OA@Yale by Brian L

Brian L — Thu, 14 May 2009 20:55:41 +0000

Great work! I think your group presents a very strong, compelling case for OA and your statistics show that there is considerable support and interest in adopting OA policies at Yale.

I have one question for your group. In your proposal. you say that the “The Provost’s Office may make the article available to the public in an open-access repository.” Does this mean that all scholarly articles should be published in a centralized Yale-administered open-access repository or that the Office of the Provost should be charged with ensuring that articles are uploaded to any of the already existent depositories (like http://arxiv.org/, for example)?

Comment on OA@Yale by Adi Kamdar

Adi Kamdar — Tue, 12 May 2009 00:18:31 +0000

We’re on Open Access News!

http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2009/05/student-campaign-for-oa-at-yale.html

Comment on Patents without Monopolies by Mike M

Mike M — Sat, 09 May 2009 21:45:50 +0000

Given people’s (justified, I think) concern about the auction mechanism overpricing patents, it’s interesting to note that Kremer’s proposal actually calls for the government to pay the inventor a markup in addition to the highest bid. Apparently, he was concerned about private bidders undervaluing patents because a private bidder cannot recover the social value of the patent. In my view, that seems to put a lot more faith in auctions than most people would be comfortable with.

Comment on Patents without Monopolies by Stuart S

Stuart S — Fri, 08 May 2009 22:23:50 +0000

I agree. This is a very interesting proposal, but I am not sure that it is ready for implementation just yet. The cotton gin example doesn’t seem all that ideal, as Whitney was essentially forced to accept the buyout due to infringement of his patent. In terms of “fair” buyouts, it would be quite hard to determine “fair” prices. I could easily see a system guided by strict rules overpaying for some patents and paying way too little for others. I think we should make sure to bolster the public domain and benefit the public good, but we should also make sure that innovators are compensated for the costs of their inventions (in addition to being compensated, however modestly, for these advancements). Interesting contribution to the general discussion!

Comment on Patents without Monopolies by Bonanza C

Bonanza C — Fri, 08 May 2009 21:14:00 +0000

Yeah it’s definitely interesting, but I’d agree with most of that second to last paragraph. The solution proposed still doesn’t fix the issue of there being too many patents, some of which should not even be granted in the first place. To me, 90% seems high when I imagine how many patents that get approved might actually get used (then again I’m sure he’s thought it through more than my 10 seconds of imagination).

About that idea that auctions wouldn’t price patents well – auctions can’t even price regular items well, so the idea of it pricing a patent correctly is even harder to believe. It’s called the Winner’s Curse I think; the people who tend to win the auction are going to be the people who overprice items the most. Auctions then usually go for higher prices than what they should. Even using the third highest bid would probably still capture a price higher than what it deserves.