<?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>Crikey &#187; copyright</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.crikey.com.au/topic/copyright/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.crikey.com.au</link>
	<description>now with extra source</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:25:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>When the Dotcom bubble burst, my (legal) Megauploads vanished</title>
		<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/01/27/kim-dotcom-and-losing-data-on-megaupload/</link>
		<comments>http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/01/27/kim-dotcom-and-losing-data-on-megaupload/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 02:09:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Crikey Intern</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Online]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[downloading]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[file sharing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kim Dotcom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Megaupload]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=270809</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@rupertmurdoch No excuses for phone hacking. No argument. No excuses either for copyright stealing, but plenty of ignorant argument! There are no excuses for copyright &#8220;stealing&#8221;&#8201;&#8212;&#8201;nor are there excuses for falling for the fallacy of invincible ignorance. A New Zealand judge denied bail to Kim Dotcom earlier this week, the founder of cyberlocker Megaupload. This means that [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/01/27/kim-dotcom-and-losing-data-on-megaupload/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Attacking privacy under the cover of &#8216;cyber war&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/08/04/attacking-privacy-under-the-cover-of-cyber-war/</link>
		<comments>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/08/04/attacking-privacy-under-the-cover-of-cyber-war/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2011 02:57:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bernard Keane</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Online]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cyber military industrial complex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cyber warfare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[espionage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[filesharing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War on the Internet]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=239322</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The conflation of very different forms of online activity underlies the use of "cyber war" as a pretext for reducing privacy and funding contractors.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/08/04/attacking-privacy-under-the-cover-of-cyber-war/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cyberspace freedom &#8230; except where they upset the copyright industry</title>
		<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/05/20/cyberspace-freedom-except-where-they-upset-the-copyright-industry/</link>
		<comments>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/05/20/cyberspace-freedom-except-where-they-upset-the-copyright-industry/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 03:02:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bernard Keane</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cyberspace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillary Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[internet filtering]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=224425</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Obama Administration's Cyberspace strategy places heavy emphasis on freedom, but in practice it's only as much freedom as the copyright industry wants]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/05/20/cyberspace-freedom-except-where-they-upset-the-copyright-industry/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Federal government on privacy: do as I say, not as I do</title>
		<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/05/03/federal-government-on-privacy-do-as-i-say-not-as-i-do/</link>
		<comments>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/05/03/federal-government-on-privacy-do-as-i-say-not-as-i-do/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 03:30:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bernard Keane</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Australian Law Reform Commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brendan O'Connor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Electrac]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Feedback]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political parties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=220668</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The federal government is threatening to impose tighter laws on corporations over privacy breaches. But it's not in a position of moral authority ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/05/03/federal-government-on-privacy-do-as-i-say-not-as-i-do/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>US renews secret push to impose its failed copyright regime</title>
		<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/14/us-renews-secret-push-to-impose-its-failed-copyright-regime/</link>
		<comments>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/14/us-renews-secret-push-to-impose-its-failed-copyright-regime/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2011 01:50:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bernard Keane</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectial property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trans-Pacific Partnership]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=210216</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Having failed to use the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement to impose a draconian intellectual property regime, the US is using a "free trade" agreement involving Australia to do the same.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/14/us-renews-secret-push-to-impose-its-failed-copyright-regime/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8216;Arrogant&#8217; Apple faces copyright suit over iPhone app content</title>
		<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/14/arrogant-apple-faces-copyright-suit-over-iphone-app-content/</link>
		<comments>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/14/arrogant-apple-faces-copyright-suit-over-iphone-app-content/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2011 01:50:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stilgherrian</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Companies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Online]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iPhone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iPhone app]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=210247</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Apple is back in the Federal Court tomorrow, facing a copyright infringement claim from Australian TV production company Jigsaw Entertainment. The precedent could be significant.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/14/arrogant-apple-faces-copyright-suit-over-iphone-app-content/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The copyright industry&#8217;s war on filesharing: outsourced and ineffectual</title>
		<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/08/the-copyright-industrys-war-on-filesharing-outsourced-and-ineffectual/</link>
		<comments>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/08/the-copyright-industrys-war-on-filesharing-outsourced-and-ineffectual/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2011 01:50:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bernard Keane</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Online]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[filesharing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iinet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISPs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=208750</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The copyright industry has changed tactics in its war on filesharing but it's still not working, even as it hits legitimate internet users.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/08/the-copyright-industrys-war-on-filesharing-outsourced-and-ineffectual/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Data download: lies, damned lies and piracy reports</title>
		<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/07/data-download-lies-damned-lies-and-piracy-reports/</link>
		<comments>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/07/data-download-lies-damned-lies-and-piracy-reports/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2011 02:07:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bernard Keane</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Journalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Online]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[downloading]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movie industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[music industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[online piracy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=208228</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Illegal downloading will cost the industry over $5 billion by 2016 and "8000 fewer jobs in the core content industries last year", according to a report in Fairfax papers. But that's not telling the whole story.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/07/data-download-lies-damned-lies-and-piracy-reports/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>27</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Internet hijackers: stealing content and avoiding blame</title>
		<link>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/28/business/media/28carr.html?partner=rss&#038;emc=rss</link>
		<comments>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/28/business/media/28carr.html?partner=rss&#038;emc=rss#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2010 02:22:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Crikey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Links]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Online]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Print]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rolling Stone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stanley McChrystal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Time]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=149207</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why did Time.com and Politico, two well respected news sites, completely violate copyright and publish the infamous <em>Rolling Stone</em> <a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236">McChrystal profile</a> on their sites? ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/28/business/media/28carr.html?partner=rss&#038;emc=rss/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PHOTO GALLERY: The mystery of the reoccurring newspaper prop</title>
		<link>http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/06/04/lol-the-reoccurring-prop-newspaper/</link>
		<comments>http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/06/04/lol-the-reoccurring-prop-newspaper/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2010 23:42:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Crikey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Film & TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Links]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[film]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[photo galleries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[props]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=145423</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Film geeks noticed that the same newspaper kept popping up in film and television from the last few decades. Is it an inside joke for propmasters or just that its the <a href="http://slate.com/blogs/blogs/browbeat/archive/2010/06/07/the-story-behind-the-recycled-newspaper-prop.aspx">easiest prop newspaper around</a>? ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/06/04/lol-the-reoccurring-prop-newspaper/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How frugal Fitness First is creating a market for fake pop stars</title>
		<link>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748703691804575254274249094574.html#mod=todays_us_nonsub_page_one</link>
		<comments>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748703691804575254274249094574.html#mod=todays_us_nonsub_page_one#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 02:07:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Crikey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Companies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Links]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Music]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fitness First]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[music copyright]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=140684</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Aussie gyms are now required to pay royalties for original songs played in their aerobic classes. But instead of coughing up the cash, they've replaced the top 40 tracks with budget brand cover versions.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748703691804575254274249094574.html#mod=todays_us_nonsub_page_one/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Google picks on Australian start-up</title>
		<link>http://www.zdnet.com.au/google-slams-oz-start-up-with-legal-bid-339302741.htm</link>
		<comments>http://www.zdnet.com.au/google-slams-oz-start-up-with-legal-bid-339302741.htm#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Apr 2010 00:08:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Crikey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Links]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Online]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Groggle]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=134217</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Google has sent a cease and desist letter to Australian alcohol price comparison website <a href="http://www.groggle.com.au/">Groggle.com.au</a>, telling it to hand over the domain name.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.zdnet.com.au/google-slams-oz-start-up-with-legal-bid-339302741.htm/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is this the downfall of Downfall parodies?</title>
		<link>http://mashable.com/2010/04/20/dmca-hitler/</link>
		<comments>http://mashable.com/2010/04/20/dmca-hitler/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Apr 2010 04:40:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Crikey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Links]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Online]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Downfall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Downfall meme]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=132444</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The movie studio behind the German <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downfall_%28film%29#Parodies">film-turned-internet-meme</a> <em>Downfall</em> has started removing the parodies off YouTube. Wait until Hitler finds out about <em>this</em>...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://mashable.com/2010/04/20/dmca-hitler/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Has the world run out of good band names?</title>
		<link>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748703357104575045584007339958.html</link>
		<comments>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748703357104575045584007339958.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 00:06:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Crikey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Links]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Music]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[band names]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=117604</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A band's name can make or break its career, but thanks to the internet, an increasing number of acts are discovering their witty moniker isn't quite as original as they'd first thought.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748703357104575045584007339958.html/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Riffing on the Down Under decision</title>
		<link>http://blogs.crikey.com.au/johnnys/2010/02/09/view-from-the-gum-tree-riffing-on-the-down-under-decision/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.crikey.com.au/johnnys/2010/02/09/view-from-the-gum-tree-riffing-on-the-down-under-decision/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 02:17:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Crikey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Links]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Music]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gumtree]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Land Down Under]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Men at Work]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=115282</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Colin Hay may be a great musician, but his claim that it took almost two decades for anyone to notice that <em>Land Down Under</em> sounds a little bit like <em>Kookaburra</em> is absurd, says <b>Tim Dunlop</b>.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.crikey.com.au/johnnys/2010/02/09/view-from-the-gum-tree-riffing-on-the-down-under-decision/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pecking holes in the Men At Work vs. Kookaburra case</title>
		<link>http://leapster.cust.nearlyfreespeech.net/?p=168</link>
		<comments>http://leapster.cust.nearlyfreespeech.net/?p=168#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Feb 2010 12:18:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Crikey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Links]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Music]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gumtree]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Men at Work]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[royalties]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=114756</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Have you ever actually listened to <em>Land Down Under</em> and thought: "Ah yes, the flute part is the kookaburra song"? asks <b>Leaping Larry L</b>. In fact, have you ever even noticed there <em>was</em> a flute before?]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://leapster.cust.nearlyfreespeech.net/?p=168/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>iiTrial: ISPs not responsible for users&#8217; copyright infringement</title>
		<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/02/04/iitrial-isps-not-responsible-for-users-copyright-infringement/</link>
		<comments>http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/02/04/iitrial-isps-not-responsible-for-users-copyright-infringement/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:41:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stilgherrian</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Companies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science & Tech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[file sharing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iinet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[internet piracy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[internet service providers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=114232</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A landmark ruling in Australia's Federal Court today has cleared internet service provider iiNet from responsibility for its users' illegal file sharing. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/02/04/iitrial-isps-not-responsible-for-users-copyright-infringement/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SBS v Crikey: SBS pursues legal action over &#8220;the world game&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/12/21/sbs-v-crikey-sbs-pursues-legal-action-over-the-world-game/</link>
		<comments>http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/12/21/sbs-v-crikey-sbs-pursues-legal-action-over-the-world-game/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 02:35:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Margaret Simons</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Online]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crikey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[football]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SBS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[soccer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Soccer™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trademark]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=107326</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The battle between SBS and your very own <em>Crikey</em> has progressed, but sadly is about to be aborted by <em>Crikey</em> agreeing to change the tag for that section of its site that has been (until today) aggregating coverage of soccer under the tag “the world game”.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/12/21/sbs-v-crikey-sbs-pursues-legal-action-over-the-world-game/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Exciting new media, same old laws</title>
		<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/12/07/exciting-new-media-same-old-laws/</link>
		<comments>http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/12/07/exciting-new-media-same-old-laws/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 02:28:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Crikey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Online]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Ad Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[advertising agencies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[digital media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[YouTube]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=103637</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the digital age, access to material and media has become so easy that advertisers risk forgetting that the old laws still apply, writes <b>Tony Richardson</b>. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/12/07/exciting-new-media-same-old-laws/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Just whose world game is it anyway?</title>
		<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/12/02/just-whose-world-game-is-it-anyway/</link>
		<comments>http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/12/02/just-whose-world-game-is-it-anyway/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 02:20:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Margaret Simons</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Sport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV & Radio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SBS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Soccer™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=102560</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SBS claims that <i>Crikey</i>'s use of a content tag "the world game" on articles about soccer is a breach of its property rights. Can an organisation really own such a common phrase?]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/12/02/just-whose-world-game-is-it-anyway/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>31</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is colour a limited resource?</title>
		<link>http://sixrevisions.com/web_design/color-the-next-limited-resource/</link>
		<comments>http://sixrevisions.com/web_design/color-the-next-limited-resource/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 20:00:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Crikey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art & Design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Links]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Ad Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[colour palette]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pantone]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=99130</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The colour palette is shrinking as brands stake their claim, bit-by-bit, on the exclusive rights to individual tones. You already can't use Jay-Z blue, or T-Mobile's magenta. Are we literally selling off the rainbow?]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://sixrevisions.com/web_design/color-the-next-limited-resource/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Monopoly ruined my life!&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125599860004295449.html</link>
		<comments>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125599860004295449.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 04:33:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Crikey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Companies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Links]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[People & Ideas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[boardgames]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hasbro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[monopoly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ralph Anspac]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=94402</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[83-year-old economics professor Ralph Anspac has spent the better part of his life locked in battle with Monopoly-maker Hasbro over the rights to sell his own game called Anti-Monopoly, and to expose what he says is the "true" history of the boardgame.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125599860004295449.html/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why AFACT v iiNet is important</title>
		<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/08/why-afact-v-iinet-is-important/</link>
		<comments>http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/08/why-afact-v-iinet-is-important/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 02:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stilgherrian</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Companies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Online]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[afact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bittorrent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iinet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peer-to-peer file sharing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telecommunications]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/07/why-afact-v-iinet-is-important/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[iiNet is battling AFACT over illegal sharing of copyright films, tv and music via peer-to-peer networks, and the implications will be wide reaching. Who <em>is</em> responsible for the content of internet traffic?]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/08/why-afact-v-iinet-is-important/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Oh Pooh! Disney wins Winnie case</title>
		<link>http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-disney29-2009sep29,0,3287132.story</link>
		<comments>http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-disney29-2009sep29,0,3287132.story#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:00:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Crikey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Companies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Links]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Walt Disney Company]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Winnie the Pooh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=90205</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Walt Disney Co. has confirmed its right to exploit the Winnie the Pooh characters, after winning an 18-year battle with The Slesinger family. Sorry purists, the newer plastic fantastic version of Winnie is here to stay.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-disney29-2009sep29,0,3287132.story/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How Google bought our literary heritage for a bargain</title>
		<link>http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/sep/06/google-digital-books-chin</link>
		<comments>http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/sep/06/google-digital-books-chin#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2009 03:06:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Crikey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Links]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Online]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[publishing industy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=84630</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last year's controversial <a href="http://books.google.com/googlebooks/agreement/">court settlement</a> that allows Google Books to scan and publish millions of books for only $125m gives the company a "stranglehold on mankind's literary heritage", says <b>John Naughton</b>. Have we sold-off our culture?]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/sep/06/google-digital-books-chin/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Object Caching 1643/1920 objects using apc

Served from: www.crikey.com.au @ 2012-02-11 23:54:50 -->
