The invention of shops was a great boost to retail trade ... |
Maine's greatest invention: salmon that have been genetically modified to jump into fishermen's hands ... |
Around the weblogs. Ben Challis's "2012 -- the Copyright Year", which you can find on the 1709 Blog here, offers a broad perspective on events in the past 12 months, while another review of the year, being Daniel Alexander QC's paper for AIPPI UK, appears on PatLit here. "Don't do contingency deals with inventors", warns Mark Anderson on the IP Draughts blog. If you want to know why, click here to find out. Mike Mireles, who has just joined the IP Finance blog team, comments on the US$ 527 million Kodak patent sale.
Here's a book which you may wish to peruse ...: It's called Model Law for Intellectual Property A Proposal for German Law Reform and, for the benefit of the lazy, the busy and the impatient, this is the Abbreviated English Edition. Under the stewardship of editors Hans-Jürgen Ahrens and Mary-Rose McGuire, it summarises several years of research and careful thought, backed by GRUR, which led to the publication of the 844-page German version (as against 150 pages for the abbreviated version). The Model Law on IP will be formally presented to a wider public at a Conference in Mannheim on 7 and 8 February 2013 -- but you can place your order for the English version long before then. At just 29 euros it looks a bargain. For further details click the Sellier website here.
... and here's a book you won't be able to put down -- assuming that you can pick it up. It's Faking It: Manipulated Photography before Photoshop, by Mia Fineman. Published by the Metropolitan Museum of Art, which is currently hosting an exhibition on this very theme, and distributed by Yale Books, this extremely heavy work will consume your hand-luggage allowance with no trouble, but it's well worth lugging it around till you've finished it. The lavishly-illustrated text provides a great deal to think about if you ever seriously believed the old truism that "the camera doesn't lie". The publishers also address the 'orphan work' issue by publishing some illustrations which, it is plain, they regard as potentially infringing and asking owners of copyright who have not given them permission to get in touch with them.
never mind Photoshop, here's photographic evidence (genuine, according to the secure time and date stamps) that the Russians landed on the moon first, Stalin owned on iPhone and some other gems:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.elcomsoft.com/canon.html?r1=pr&r2=canon
two articles discussing
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/30/canon_verification_cracked/
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20025286-264.html
I've just ordered the book by Mia Fineman, I expect I'll enjoy it, but I wonder about the comment in the editor's blurb on John Heartfield and friends being "treated as conspicuous anomalies".
ReplyDeleteRegarding orphan works, I'm a fixture of restored film screenings.
A common feature of such events is to listen to someone recounting how decaying nitrate copies were hunted down in Valparaiso, Vancouver, Vladivostok, Vientiane and Venice. How they lovingly rebuilt the copy frame by frame, and figuring out which order they went in by decrypting censorship reports. And then how some random bloke came out of the woods purporting to own some rights over the material that would have sunk into chemical oblivion hadn't it been for the toils of others. You can't help wondering about the legitimacy of copyright law.