Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Thursday August 28 2014, @05:47AM   Printer-friendly
from the some-good-news dept.

Mike Masnick at TechDirt has posted Intellectual Property Casebook Now Available As A Free Download:

James Boyle and Jennifer Jenkins of the Center of the Study of the Public Domain at Duke Law School releasing a free download of an Intellectual Property Statutory Supplement (which normally big publishers try to sell for around $50). As noted, this was a kickoff for an even bigger project, an open coursebook in intellectual property. That Open Intellectual Property Casebook is now available. You can download the whole thing for free. If you want a nice printed copy, it'll currently run about $24 on Amazon -- which is about $135 less than other IP case books. The entire book weighs in at nearly 800 pages, so there's a lot in there if you felt like delving into a variety of topics around copyright, trademark and patent law -- including specific efforts by Congress around those laws and the way that the courts have interpreted them.

However, they also note that it's not just about making the books cheaper, but better and more useful:

Our point is not only that the current casebook is vastly too expensive, it is also awkward, inflexible, lacking visual stimulus, incapable of customization and hard to preview and search on the open web. Casebooks do not respond well to the different needs of different professors. Students cannot easily be given free, searchable digital access to all the materials, on all their devices, anywhere, access that does not go away when the course—or the publisher—ends. We can do that.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28 2014, @07:06AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28 2014, @07:06AM (#86637)

    Link: https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/pdf/IPCasebook2014.pdf [duke.edu]

    License: CC by-nc-sa 3.0

    You're welcome.

    • (Score: 3, Funny) by c0lo on Thursday August 28 2014, @07:19AM

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday August 28 2014, @07:19AM (#86640) Journal

      You're welcome.

      Thanks, but no thanks. The casebook is useless to me; may a have a bookcase instead?

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
  • (Score: 1, Flamebait) by aristarchus on Thursday August 28 2014, @07:17AM

    by aristarchus (2645) on Thursday August 28 2014, @07:17AM (#86639) Journal

    And we all know where a recursive self-contraction leads, it was in the movie with Kris Kristofferson about plane crashes and stewardesses from the future: "it's a god-damned paradox, Louise!". If there was a copyright on the case book for copyright law, you could not know what copyright law was without violating copyright law in the first place. Seems kind of like EULAs, an non-negotiated contract, and thus not a contract at all. I am really at the point of saying that if anyone makes anything available to the public at all, it is already public domain. If you do not want your "creative works" shared on-line, keep them to yourself, or have each and every recipient of your masterwork sign a legally binding Non-Disclosure Agreement. (Note: this still may not work if you are trying to conceal illegal activities, like the NSA.) And the corollary is that every person on the internet has a moral obligation to share whatever they have access to, that does not violate a legitimate and timely NDA.

    To all you Republicans, fascists, and Libertarians out there saying that if this is the way it is going to be, that you going to go Galt or try to take over the state, I can only say, "be my guest". No one will miss works produced for a profit motive, because they suck.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28 2014, @03:48PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28 2014, @03:48PM (#86767)

      You were doing ok until

      To all you Republicans, fascists, and Libertarians out there saying that if this is the way it is going to be, that you going to go Galt or try to take over the state, I can only say, "be my guest".

      Your bigotry is showing...

      Whats the difference between a bigot and a racists? One is just more specialized.

      No one will miss works produced for a profit motive, because they suck.
      You must be 'fun' to hang around with. Being a cynical bastard myself I at least enjoy the works of others. I understand sometimes they want remuneration for what they did. You on the other had have decided you 'deserve' the works of others for free. Your idea of freedom I find quite binding and in many ways fascist. I like the idea people can chose to give something away and/or ask for money too. Your way is basically theft and intellectually lazy.

      • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Friday August 29 2014, @03:39AM

        by aristarchus (2645) on Friday August 29 2014, @03:39AM (#87038) Journal

        I was doing OK. . . . hey, wait! Did I give you permission to copy my words? You didn't pay me for them! Help! I am being oppressed! Come see the violence inherent in the system! Did you see the AC oppressing me? /montlypython

        Freedom is a funny thing, for it seems it almost always involved the coercion of others. The question is what restrictions are legitimate. I am suggesting that copyright is not among these, and that it should be treated more like trade secrets (hide it or lose it!). Liberalism is the political theory that suggests we should have the maximum amount of personal freedom that is compatible with a like freedom for all. Copyright laws are in direct contradiction to this, unless they actually tend "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts". Once they don't, they are rent-seeking, and not compatible with like freedom for all.

        My way is theft? Maybe, if there was anything to steal! Not paying some hack for perusing a very bad work is not taking anything from them, it is just not recognizing their right to extort money for crap. I am not sure how this is intellectually lazy. Do you suggest that I am going into the heads of our genius artist-entrepreneurs and stealing their ideas instead of creating them myself? I am sorry, but I do not believe it is impossible to steal ideas. They certainly cannot be copyrighted. And usually you cannot give away good idea, or get them into the heads of others, because even to steal an idea you have to first understand it, which is often more intellectual labor that coming up with the idea in the first place.

        Sorry to go on so long. You were right to call me on the rant. You can use this post in any fashion you desire, so long as attribution is made. (Creative Commons)

  • (Score: 1) by E_NOENT on Thursday August 28 2014, @06:36PM

    by E_NOENT (630) on Thursday August 28 2014, @06:36PM (#86856) Journal

    Thanks for the link. It might make good bathroom reading, if nothing else.

    --
    I'm not in the business... I *am* the business.