The New York Times reports on a study by the University of California at Berkeley’s School of Information Management and Systems finding that humans stored 5 exabytes (equivalent to the storage capacity of 50 million computers, assuming they all had hard drive capacities of 100 gigabytes) of information on paper, film or optical media in 2002. The IPKat notes that much of this information will be eligible for protection by copyright. This is especially true since by looking at recorded information, the study is focusing on works that will satisfy the fixation requirement that triggers copyright protection. This goes to show that although there are billions of works that are strictly entitled to copyright protection, the system relies on: (a) authors not enforcing their rights to trivial works and (b) the fact that most works will never be copied.
Information on coping with information overload here and here
Deadwood issues here and here
Information on coping with information overload here and here
Deadwood issues here and here
INFORMATION SOCIETY OR INFORMATION OVERLOAD?
![<strong>INFORMATION SOCIETY OR INFORMATION OVERLOAD?</strong>]()
Reviewed by Anonymous
on
Friday, November 14, 2003
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html