<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>GeekPAC &#187; Sherwin Siy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.geek-pac.org/blog/author/sherwin-siy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.geek-pac.org/blog</link>
	<description>Fight for Your Information Rights</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2009 05:51:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>PublicKnowledge: Why the Cablevision Decision Matters</title>
		<link>http://www.geek-pac.org/blog/2008/08/publicknowledge-why-the-cablevision-decision-matters/</link>
		<comments>http://www.geek-pac.org/blog/2008/08/publicknowledge-why-the-cablevision-decision-matters/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 22:15:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sherwin Siy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Extra]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cablevision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[publicknowledge]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>In my <a href="http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/1697" rel="nofollow">post from Monday</a>, I laid out a very brief outline of some of the conclusions reached by the Second Circuit in its <a href="http://www.publicknowledge.org/pdf/cablevision-decision-20080804.pdf" rel="nofollow"><em>Cablevision</em> decision</a> on remote DVRs. Today, I want to take a step back and discuss why it was so important for the development of digital media and technology.</p>

<p>Two theories <a href="http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/studios_v_cablevision/07-1480-cv(L),%2007-1511-cv(CON)%20The%20Cartoon%20Network%20LP,%20LLLP,%20et%20al.%20Appellees%20Brief-1.pdf" rel="nofollow">espoused by the TV networks</a> in the case were extraordinarily dangerous for copyright law.  The first was that fleeting, transitory copies like buffer copies could make someone liable for copyright infringement.</p><p><a href="http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/1700">read more</a></p><div class="feedflare">
<a href="http://feeds.publicknowledge.org/~f/publicknowledge-main?a=3IRJuK"><img src="http://feeds.publicknowledge.org/~f/publicknowledge-main?i=3IRJuK" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.publicknowledge.org/~f/publicknowledge-main?a=Or42hk"><img src="http://feeds.publicknowledge.org/~f/publicknowledge-main?i=Or42hk" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.publicknowledge.org/~f/publicknowledge-main?a=A8zubk"><img src="http://feeds.publicknowledge.org/~f/publicknowledge-main?i=A8zubk" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.publicknowledge.org/~f/publicknowledge-main?a=bO702K"><img src="http://feeds.publicknowledge.org/~f/publicknowledge-main?i=bO702K" border="0"></img></a>
</div><img src="http://feeds.publicknowledge.org/~r/publicknowledge-main/~4/358835473" height="1" width="1"/> <a href="http://www.geek-pac.org/blog/2008/08/publicknowledge-why-the-cablevision-decision-matters/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In my <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/1697">post from Monday</a>, I laid out a very brief outline of some of the conclusions reached by the Second Circuit in its <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.publicknowledge.org/pdf/cablevision-decision-20080804.pdf"><em>Cablevision</em> decision</a> on remote DVRs. Today, I want to take a step back and discuss why it was so important for the development of digital media and technology.</p>
<p>Two theories <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/studios_v_cablevision/07-1480-cv(L),%2007-1511-cv(CON)%20The%20Cartoon%20Network%20LP,%20LLLP,%20et%20al.%20Appellees%20Brief-1.pdf">espoused by the TV networks</a> in the case were extraordinarily dangerous for copyright law.  The first was that fleeting, transitory copies like buffer copies could make someone liable for copyright infringement.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/1700">read more</a></p>
<p><img src="http://feeds.publicknowledge.org/~r/publicknowledge-main/~4/358835473" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.geek-pac.org/blog/2008/08/publicknowledge-why-the-cablevision-decision-matters/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
