Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

This article was issued October 27, 2010. This article was written by a frequent writer, David Kravets. It was edited by Kevin Poulsen and contributions to the article were made by Kim Zetter and Ryan Singel. This article is discussing the "loophole" that was found in order to avoid copyright infringement lawsuits. All that was needed was the smAll payment of $105. After paying this, if any information found on the cite that was not from the author, such as comment or a blog, the writer of the article cannot be sued. This way, the owners of the article would not be responsible for any information that they themselves do not post. This may seem quite silly, but keeping in mind the danger of being sued for copyright infringement for $150,000, this is a very necessary $150. According to the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act), a website will receive complete immunity from the threat of being sued by something that was posted by a viewer. The author does not clearly show any bias towards the issue. However interpreting the language that he uses, we can infer that he agrees and supports this act. Therefore websites cannot be held responsible for what their viewers post.

Issued: March 2009. Big companies are starting to crack down on copyright infringements. With over 15 lawsuits in 2007, the number of lawsuits targeted against blogs has started to rapidly rise. The author, Brian Stelter, is a writer for New York Times who's main focus is on television and the digital media. This article seems to be aimed at the big companies who the author believes are unfairly digging into to copyright laws. The article mentions a lot of disputes such as the ones between New York Times and Gate House Media, Silicon Alley Insider and The WAll Street Journal, Associated Press and All Headlines News and others. Most of the websites getting sued were blogs or newspaper websites that quoted other people's works, assuming it would be okay under the "fair use" statute of copyright laws.

i went to the New York Times online to search the term, "copyright" to get an article relating to copyright issues or infringement. this article by Brian Stelter was published on March 1st, 2009. Stelter is a journalist for the New York Times. Stelter sides with the people who claim to be getting copyrighted. He bases the majority of his article against the bloggers and other online publishes "who seem to be on the rise." He also questions when excerpting from an article becomes illegal copying. Although he mostly sides with the people claiming to be copyrighted he also sheds light on those bloggers and online publishers whom give credit to those sites they excerpted information from. Statler keeps bringing up the issue of "excerpting to find value" in which online publishers combine articles to validate their thesis. In the end, Statler shows both sides of the story and doesn't leave out any information regarding the thoughts of both parties.

By BRIAN STELTER Published: March 1, 2009 Brian Stelter focuses on a quotation from the Silicon Alley Insider which quoted a quarter of Peggy Noonan's WAll Street Journal. "We thank Dow Jones in advance for Allowing us to bring it to you." The editor added "in advance" because Dow Jones, the publisher of The Journal, had not given the blog permission to use the column. With this particular instance of copyright infringement and others, Stetler brings light to the fact that permission isn't being given between different industries when taking direct quotations or titles from that industries publication. "Some media executives are growing concerned that the increasingly popular curators of the Web that are taking large pieces of the original work - a practice sometimes cAlled scraping - are shaving away potential readers and profiting from the content." He also brings up the numerous lawsuits that arise because of copyright infringement.

Many students in this new generation are plagiarizing other people's work for academic gain. Some college professors hypothesize that this is due t the laziness of students nowadays. Others believe it is because students were never taught about plagiarizing in middle school and highschool, so they do not understand that what they are doing is bad. However, regardless the case, internet is leading to an easy accessibility of past works, which makes it further difficult to stop plagiarizing.

In the USA, intellectual piracy laws outlaw piracy of goods from all forms of the market, from medical to the watch industry. This helps prevent the origenal producers of drugs and products from losesing billions on the market. China does not have such laws, allowing for piracy of everything from Viagra to Rolex, causing companies to lose billions

China does not have these laws primarily because under communism, there is no privet property, including ideas. This allows for easy bootlegging of products, and when this involves drugs such as Viagra, it endangers the lives of the people using the bootlegged drug, because there has not necessarily been the same testing of the bootlegged drug as there is on the drug made by the company. Intellectual property laws ensure quality within a product.

"I can't afford to pay any amount. It's not a matter of won't, it's a matter of I can't." In Minnesota, this is the response that Jammie Thomas-Rasset made about paying 1.5 million dollars for the illegal sharing of music online. Each of the 24 songs that she illegally violated copyrights on is $62,500. Her defense is that she can't afford to pay that kind of money, especially since she is the mother of four children. Sharing over 1,700 songs on Kazaa, a file-sharing site, the Recording Industry of America, on numerous occasions, had tried to settle with the woman at $5,000. The stubborn Thomas-Rasset refused and was criticized for not taking responsibility for her actions. Due to all these problems, Jammie was taken on trial and was proven guilty. Jammie persistently denies her use of Kazaa and is willing to keep fighting. Many people are in the same position as Jammie, and as the saying goes, "Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time."

Issued on April 6, 2010 in San Francisco. This article was written by Miguel Helft in the New York Times. He is a well known author for the New York Times that covers Internet companies such as Google or Yahoo. This article discusses how photographers and other artists filed a lawsuit against google for the mass copying their work. The artists claimed that they were not adequately compensated by google for the use of their work. Google was given permission from the visual artists to scan their work onto the website, however the artists feel that this partnering program with Google turned out to be unfair. Google is now being sued for copyright infringement. This article is informative to all people because it shows that even largely popular websites like Google may not be as trustworthy as perceived.

4. Date Issued: Wednesday, Jul. 28, 2010. An article from the TIME magazine written by Adam Cohen. Cohen, a lawyer, is a former TIME writer and a former member of the New York Times editorial board. The article focuses on the jail breaking being legal or illegal and the fight between Apple and customers who rebels against all the rules Apple has chosen for them; unfairly. But the Liberty of congress has concluded that jail breaking is a fair use. Also The Electronic Frontier Foundation mentioned that they asked the Copyright Office to give a green light to the people who jailbreaks their iPhones. But of course there are others who go against jail breaking and say that it is indeed illegal. The author here is unbiased and informative even though he is 'one of those iPhone maniacs' because he shows both point of views equally.

I googled Media and Culture and this is the first thing that came up. It's a book that teaches about mass communication.

Good Work! We have this book if you want to borrow it. It's also all available online.

new camera settings tricks

fascinating acount of "universal" melodies -

This article highlights the continued conflict between the MTV show "Jersey Shore" and the Italian-American group UNICO. UNICO has been critical of the show since the beginning, commenting that the show "perpetuates all sorts of negative stereotypes." The article also discusses how Snooki, a character from the television series, has criticized UNICO and the multiple companies who have pulled their advertisements from the show, including Dell and Dominoes Pizza. In response to the comments, UNICO issued a statement saying "She is not an embarrassment to Italian Americans -- she is actually an embarrassment to the entire human race!!!!"

This article talks about how advertisers such as Dominoes and Italian Americans groups are boycotting against the TV show "Jersey Shore". Dominoes has stopped advertising for "Jersey Shore" and is influencing other advertisers to follow. The largest Italian American group is the US ,Unico's, president Andre Demint and is telling all members to boycott by refusing to watch this show.

"Jersey Shore," the MTV reality show that claims to lift the veil over "one of the Tri-state area's most misunderstood species … the GUIDO" (as per its press materials), is offensive to Italian-Americans and shouldn't air, says Andre Dimino, the president of UNICO, the national Italian-American service organization based in Fairfield.

http://www.nj.com/entertainment/celebrities/index.ssf/2009/11/jersey_shore_offends_italian-a.html This article sets out trying to defend MTV's newest show, Jersey Shore by supplying 5 redeeming qualities. The author can only think of four! The first being, the Jersey shore is not actually that interesting and this portrayal will attract a lot of teenagers and young adults looking for the fun times shown on the program, boosting Jersey Shore's tourism rates and their economy. Two: this show will kill off the show "Keeping Up with the Kardashians," a show that the author apparently dislikes more than Jersey Shore. Three: young people need bad examples to learn what not to do. And four: Now we can shut down all the things that led to the Actors stupidity and bad judgments like the schools they frequented.

In this article they are not talking a lot about the plot and setting about Jersey Shore. Rather, they are talking about the word guido and the stereotype this show is making. This article is saying that the word guido is a word that is very offensive to all Italian Americans. They say the word guido is a very offensive word for Italian Americans and they are shocked by how MTV is using it like it means nothing on network television. The article definitely has a point because the word guido is a very demeaning word for Italian Americans. The article talks about how the word guido is not the term you could usually call someone and pretend it's not a big deal. They say that because of the show Jersey Shore, it is a much more common word and it is making the population of young Italian Americans look bad.

AT&T predicts the hyperconnected screen-based future back in 1993-94.

NPR-Talk of the Nation. January 31, 2011. Genre: Talk Show/ World News. Bill Gates goes onto the show to discuss the issue of polio, a disease that was thought to have been completely eliminated by vaccination. According to Bill Gates there are many countries including India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Nigeria where polio is still an epidemic. It is his goal to eliminate this disease once and for all throughout the world. Bill Gates has invested over 400 million dollars in this process.

This is the fundamental obstacle to understanding where technology culture is heading: increasingly, it's about everything.

This is the fundamental obstacle to understanding where technology culture is heading: increasingly, it's about everything.

We have all seen a commercial that we can't remember immediately after watching it, but when we see that product instantly recall the commercial. This article discusses how the advertising industry has used subliminal messaging to increase product sales and the way we remember product information.