"By Emil Protalinski | July 11, 2011, 10:40am PDT
Summary
Facebook has blocked another tool that lets you export your Facebook friends so you can import them elsewhere, like to Google+.
On Sunday July 10, 2011, Facebook blocked Open-Xchange's tool that lets Facebook users export their friends so that they can be imported into other products and services. As I reported last week, the tool used approved Facebook APIs and was not in violation of Facebook's Terms and Conditions, or at least that's what Open-Xchange's management thought. ..."
By David Nagel
05/26/11
"...The United States Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights Thursday issued a "dear colleague letter" to public K-12 institutions (as well as a separate letter to higher education institutions) and a set of answers to frequently asked questions that expands on a letter sent out exclusively to college and university presidents last June (DCL).
In the FAQ, OCR makes explicit some legal obligations of all education institutions, including K-12 institutions, to "ensure equal access to the educational benefits and opportunities afforded by the technology and equal treatment in the use of the technology for all students, including students with disabilities." At the same time, the FAQ said the intent is not to stifle the use of new and emerging technologies, but to "remind everyone that equal access for students with disabilities is the law and must be considered as new technology is integrated into the educational environment. ..."
A prominent robotics professor and a Google executive are opening up admission to their popular Stanford University course on artificial intelligence this fall to anyone online, and they have even promised to issue grades and certificates to those auditing virtually.
" Historique et organisation
Le 31 mars 2000, les éditeurs de presse quotidienne francophone et germanophone, regroupés au sein de la scrl Les Journaux Francophones Belges, ont créé la société civile sous forme de société coopérative Copiepresse. Elle est inscrite au Registre des Personnes Morales de Bruxelles et dispose du numéro de TVA 471 612 218. Elle a été agréée par les arrêtés ministériels des 14 février 2000 et 20 juin 2003 et est soumise à la supervision du Service de Contrôle des sociétés de gestion des droits du SPF Economie. "
"The purpose of this document is two-fold:
- to offer an online history of the development of the Massive Open Online Course (MOOC)
- to use that history to describe major elements of a MOOC
Each chapter of this guide looks at one of the first MOOCs and some early influences. It contains these parts:
- a description of the MOOC, what it did, and what was learned
- a description of the element of MOOC theory learned in the offering of the course
- practical tools that can be used to develop that aspect of a MOOC
- practical tips on how to be successful
Contribute to this Book
You are invited to contribute. (...)
In order to participate, please email or message your contact details, and we'll you to the list of people who can edit pages. (...)
Your contributions will be accepted and posted under a CC-By license.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/"
Alexis Boisseau - 21 septembre 2011
"Comment sait-on qu'une œuvre fait désormais partie du domaine public et que, tout en restant une création de son auteur original (ce qu'on appelle le «droit moral», qui est éternel), on peut la rééditer ou réinterpréter sans payer de «droits patrimoniaux»?
La loi est un bon premier guide, mais elle est tellement truffée d'exceptions qu'on ne peut se soustraire à des recherches parfois très longues. Dans la situation la plus courante, quand l'œuvre est «individuelle», les droits subsistent pour les ayants droits 70 ans après le 1er janvier qui suit la mort de l'auteur. Cette règle est née d'une directive européenne qui n'a été transposée en droit français qu'en 1997 et remplace, pour les œuvres qui n'étaient pas dans le domaine public au 31 décembre 1995 la durée de 50 ans de protection qui était en vigueur avant."
Reference: MEMO/11/333 Date: 24/05/2011
"What does the proposal for a Directive on orphan works say?
The Commission's proposal, which takes the form of an EU Directive, rests on three pillars. First, the proposal contains rules on how to identify orphan works. It provides that the user has to conduct a diligent search to find the copyright holder. In this search, the user should rely on sources such as databases and registries. One such tool that exists in the book publishing sector is ARROW, the Accessible Registry of Rights Information and Orphan Works. It is hoped that other sectors will also develop similar central rights information databases. Doing so would greatly simplify and streamline the conduct of a reliable diligent search.
Secondly, the proposal establishes that if the diligent search does not yield the identity or location of the copyright holder, the work shall be recognised as an orphan work. This status shall then, by virtue of mutual recognition, be valid across the European Union. This implies that once a work is recognised as an orphan work, it shall be recognised as such across the European Union. The proposal also foresees that there will be a generally accessible record of all recognised orphan works.
Thirdly, the proposal establishes the uses that can be made of the orphan works and the conditions for such uses depending on their nature. Thus, the current proposal should make a major contribution to the development of various European digital library initiatives and their accessibility for everyone throughout the European Union. Clear rules on what works can be posted online as orphan works will also provide the beneficiaries of the Directive - not only libraries, museums and archives but also film heritage institutions and public service broadcasters - with a sound legal framework that safeguards them against claims of copyright infringement. In this respect, a degree of legal certainty can be achieved that will exceed the one th
Group items tagged 
