LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 3 Nov 2016 22:24:38 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (50 lines)
From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 21:51:21 -0400

It's good that the temperature on this debate is dropping, but I don't
see the underlying issue being engaged: Isn't Pallante correct that
the Copyright Office belongs elsewhere, preferably in the Department
of Commerce? It sounds like Hayden is protecting her turf, as most
people would want to do, but the substantive issue here is still not
being addressed.

Joe Esposito

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:42 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: "Jim O'Donnell" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 20:31:12 -0400
>
> Here's a fresh posting that outlines a sensible interpretation of the
> developments at LC.
>
> https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20161031/16531435930/conspiracy-theories-run-amock-over-copyright-office-executive-changes.shtml
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 8:55 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > From: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
> > Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 00:25:40 +0000
> >
> > For what it’s worth, Billboard is reporting (citing “several sources,” all unnamed) that Pallante was not told about her change in jobs prior to the public announcement, and subsequently came to work to find that she’d been locked out of the LC computer system:
> >
> > http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/7556764/maria-pallante-departure-copyright-congress
> >
> > Billboard is something of a biased source, of course, given that it’s a music-industry paper.
> >
> > Speaking of biased sources, Digital Music News believes that Google was behind the firing:
> >
> > http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2016/10/24/pallante-dismissed-copyrights-office-google/
> >
> > From the other end of the bias spectrum, the Public Knowledge blog excoriated the Copyright Office generally and Pallante in particular in a posting this past August, characterizing the Copyright Office as a “captured agency”:
> >
> > https://www.publicknowledge.org/news-blog/blogs/the-growing-list-of-how-the-copyright-office-has-failed-us
> >
> > So yeah, it seems like these political waters are somewhat shark-infested. There’s going to be some fierce Congressional lobbying from both sides of the IP divide over the next few months.
> >
> > ---
> > Rick Anderson
> > Assoc. Dean for Collections & Scholarly Communication
> > Marriott Library, University of Utah
> > [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2