1. Monthly archive
  2. February 2016

February 2016

Donald Trump: We're going to 'open up' libel laws

Donald Trump said he plans to change libel laws in the United States so that he can have an easier time suing news organizations. During a rally in Fort Worth (TX), Trump began his usual tirade against newspapers such as The New York Times and The Washington Post, saying they're "losing money" and are "dishonest." The Republican presidential candidate then took a different turn, suggesting that when he's president they'll "have problems."

"One of the things I'm going to do if I win, and I hope we do and we're certainly leading. I'm going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money. We're going to open up those libel laws. So when The New York Times writes a hit piece which is a total disgrace or when The Washington Post, which is there for other reasons, writes a hit piece, we can sue them and win money instead of having no chance of winning because they're totally protected," Trump said.

Why net neutrality hasn't always been a partisan issue

In recent years, network neutrality regulations have become a more overtly political issue that often pits Democratic proponents against Republican opponents. But a look back at media reports on the issue over more than a decade shows that this issue hasn’t always been as nakedly partisan, though it’s arguably long been divisive.

More than a decade ago, a proposal by former Federal Communications Commission head Michael Powell that is sometimes seen as an early version of net neutrality barely merited a mention when Powell, a Republican, left the commission in 2005. The proposal, unveiled in a speech in Boulder (CO) in 2004, called for four “Internet freedoms” for consumers: the ability to access content freely, to use a variety of Internet applications without interference, to add “personal devices” to a users’ network, and to obtain information about their service plans. Instead, media accounts of his departure point to Powell’s role in the FCC’s “indecency crusade” following Janet Jackson’s infamous “wardrobe malfunction” during the 2004 Superbowl, and to his focus on maintaining a free market among cable and phone providers, arguing that came at consumers’ expense. Since his 2004 proposal, Powell who is now head of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, has often differentiated his proposals from the abstract idea of “net neutrality.” “The open Internet is a good thing,” he said at a conference in 2006 at the Museum of Television and Radio in New York, the Hollywood Reporter noted. “But ‘net neutrality’ is an invitation to draw government into the Internet in a much bigger way than people have anticipated." Companies also appeared to support Powell’s Internet freedoms, with one executive saying the principles could transcend partisan differences.

Standing with Louisville

We were heartened and encouraged when, a few weeks ago, the City of Louisville (KY) unanimously passed an ordinance that paves the way for its residents having access to faster and better broadband. So Feb 25 when we heard that AT&T was suing the City of Louisville for passing this so-called “One Touch Make Ready” rule, we were disappointed. Google Fiber stands with the City of Louisville and the other cities across the country that are taking steps to bring faster, better broadband to their residents. Such policies reduce cost, disruption, and delay, by allowing the work needed to prepare a utility pole for new fiber to be attached in as little as a single visit—which means more safety for drivers and the neighborhood. This work would be done by a team of contractors the pole owner itself has approved, instead of having multiple crews from multiple companies working on the same pole over weeks or months. One Touch Make Ready facilitates new network deployment by anyone—and that's why groups representing communities and fiber builders support it, too. Google Fiber is disappointed that AT&T has gone to court in an effort to block Louisville's efforts to increase broadband and video competition.

Dept of Commerce Official: People Won't Contribute to Digital Economy If They Think Data is Unsafe

Citizens won’t contribute to the United States’ digital commerce if they aren’t confident in the privacy and security of their data, one government official says. Asked about the ongoing battle between the FBI and Apple, asked to unlock the iPhone of one of the attackers in the San Bernardino (CA) shooting, Commerce Department's Director of Digital Economy Alan Davidson said those conflicts are “part of a set of issues” likely to arise as the government figures out how to simultaneously protect consumer data and allow it to flow around the world. “These people are not going to participate in the digital economy if they don’t feel that their privacy and security is protected," he said. Davidson said government needed to rethink its personnel structure to address the global flow of data. “We have huge apparatus that’s designed to think about trade in this old-world context,” he said, which doesn’t include the “trillions of dollars that’s now happening in the digital world.” Commerce has a deputy assistant secretary for textiles, but “we have no deputy assistant secretary for anything digital. We’re working on it, and we will be working on it,” he said.

The Need for Fair Use Guidelines for Remixes

The US copyright system strives to create a careful balance between rights and exceptions. Businesses, libraries, consumers, and especially the creative community rely on a range of exceptions and limitations, such as fair use, on a daily basis. Fair use, a fundamental element of the US copyright system, is a legal doctrine that permits the unlicensed use of copyright-protected works under certain circumstances. Because it is technology-neutral, it can be applied in a flexible manner during times of dynamic technological change. "Fair Use/Fair Dealing Week" presents an opportunity to explore various aspects of this vital part of US copyright law. We would like to add to the conversation by highlighting some recommendations that the Commerce Department's Internet Policy Task Force (IPTF) recently made in the area of remix and fair use.

At Commerce, the US Patent and Trademark Office and NTIA teamed up to release in January a major new report on copyright policy. The White Paper on Remixes, First Sale, and Statutory Damages (White Paper) considers, inter alia, the roles of fair use and licensing arrangements as they apply to remixes. User-generated content has become a hallmark of the Internet and "remixes" are part of this growing trend. Advancements in technology have made it easier than ever for people to remix content into new works, opening up new, digital avenues for creative expression. At the same time, however, remixes can raise licensing and other issues because they typically rely on someone else's copyrighted work as source material.

© 1994-2025 Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. All Rights Reserved.