Big News Wednesday: Net Neutrality is Dead (in the US)

For now, anyway. 

The FCC announced a plan to allow content providers (e.g. Netflix) to pay internet service providers (e.g. Comcast) for faster and more reliable internet connections to paying customers. This is literally the opposite of net neutrality, and goes against the trend in regulations in Europe (see this NYT article for more). What's surprising about his decision is that it didn't have to be made. Neither Comcast nor Netflix are struggling for revenue, and Google Fiber is keeping ISPs on their toes in terms of infrastructure development too. January's decision to strike down the FCC's net neutrality principles didn't say they lacked the authority in total, rather, that the FCC would first have to treat ISPs as common carriers to be able to justify the level of regulation that net neutrality entails. This is exactly the shift that we see in Europe today, but yesterday the US went in another direction. 

Reporter's Privilege (and Prior Restraint) Prezi

The recording of the lecture is up on the recordings page. PDF of the Prezi is here. Let me know if you have any questions, okay?

NYT: "When ‘Liking’ a Brand Online Voids the Right to Sue"

Bit of a public interest story here, but one that connects with a lot of topics we've been discussing all semester. I'm curious how you all react to General Mills' new policy which limits consumer rights to take action against the company if the consumer has so much as "liked" it on Facebook or downloaded a coupon from its website. According to the NYT: 

"Anyone who has received anything that could be construed as a benefit and who then has a dispute with the company over its products will have to use informal negotiation via email or go through arbitration to seek relief, according to the new terms posted on its site. In language added on Tuesday after The New York Times contacted it about the changes, General Mills seemed to go even further, suggesting that buying its products would bind consumers to those terms."

This policy is obviously appalling and seems closer to something out of a movie script that than real life. The article goes on to question whether the policy would actually hold up in court. I would also add that consumers aren't powerless, as there is almost zero reason why anyone ever needs to buy a General Mills product. I certainly won't be buying any of their foodstuffs ever again (though I'll miss the Bugles!).

Link to recorded lectures is fixed!

Seriously not my day....but, alas, the link to the recorded lectures has been fixed. You should be able to access the lectures and download to your personal computer, tablet or smart phone. Please note that the recordings for Defamation and Openness in Government lectures are from a previous semester, as I was not able to record them this spring. Thus, they may not be up to date and I strongly encourage you to supplement them (and all other recordings) with your notes from class as well as the text book. 

Required reading has been corrected

I've fixed the class schedule to reflect the correct book chapters for each week's required reading. Apologies for any confusion! I'm using the edition, FYI. Thanks to Jack for noticing the discrepancy. As always, let me know if you have any questions!

Minor Right to Speech // Privacy Prezis

Link to PDFs here. 

Defamation Prezi

As always, download a PDF of the presentation here. 

Senate takes up the Comcast-Time Warner Cable Merger

The Senate Committee of the Judiciary held hearings yesterday to press Comcast and Time Warner Cable executives on the merits of their proposed $45 billion merger. The WSJ covered the hearings, including links to Comcast's 180 page report defending the merger, noting: "If the deal wins approval, Comcast would have 30% of the nation’s pay-TV subscribers and nearly 40% of U.S. broadband subscribers." While Congress doesn't actually get to vote on the deal itself, their deliberations can shape reviews by the two Federal agencies (the Department of Justice and the FCC) that will determine if the merger will proceed. 

The hearing, and the supporting documents provide some terrific research for both sides of the media ownership debate. I encourage you to read through and use them in your term paper! 

Test II Grades are up!

The testing center worked some magic this morning. Your grades are now up here. The average (post curve) is a 74 percent. The posted grade also reflects the extra credit many of you received on Feb 24. I'm happy to go over your test with you if you'd like to see what you got wrong. Email me to set up an appointment. If you are worried about your grade, let's talk. I'm here to help! 

Also, now would be a good time to remind you to work on your term paper. 

Netflix Speaks out on Net Neutrality

Finally. Netflix chimes in, explaining its decision to pay Comcast to let Comcast's customers subscribe to Netflix. Reed Hastings (Netflix CEO) makes the case for new net neutrality regulations that are stronger than those a federal court struck down in January: 

"Some major ISPs, like Cablevision, already practice strong net neutrality and for their broadband subscribers, the quality of Netflix and other streaming services is outstanding. But on other big ISPs, due to a lack of sufficient interconnectivity, Netflix performance has been constrained, subjecting consumers who pay a lot of money for high-speed Internet to high buffering rates, long wait times and poor video quality. A recent Wall Street Journal article chronicled this degradation using our public data."

If you are interested at all in this subject, the short post is worth your time.  

GSU Library is Open for Most of Spring Break!

Contrary to popular impression, GSU's library is open for most of our break. Monday-Friday hours are 8:00 AM - 6:00 PM. The library is closed on March 16 and 22. 

Prezis for lectures on Indecency & Obscenity

As usual, you can download PDFs of the presentations here.

NYT on NYT v. Sullivan

Today's NYT includes an editorial (from the Editorial Board) entitled, "The Uninhibited Press, 50 Years Later." The piece celebrates the 50th anniversary of the historic Supreme Court case, NYT v. Sullivan (I mentioned the case last week in our discussion of commercial speech). Here is an excerpt: 

But the government can upset the Sullivan case’s delicate balance by aggressively shutting down avenues of inquiry, as the Obama administration has done to an extreme degree in prosecuting those suspected of leaking classified documents, and even seizing reporters’ records. Uninhibited and robust criticism can go only so far without meaningful access to information. Still, American press freedoms rank among the broadest in the world. Citizens and media organizations in countries from China to India to Britain do not enjoy the same protections. In many parts of the world, journalists are censored, harassed, imprisoned and worse, simply for doing their jobs and challenging or criticizing government officials. In this area of the law, at least, the United States remains a laudable example.

In addition to shaping freedom of expression law as it relates to commercial speech, the case also dealt with libel law, a topic we'll spend some time on later this semester. In the mean time, what do you think of the celebration of American's protections for freedom of expression? Are US journalists as free today as the NYT proclaims? 

Commercial Speech Prezis

As always, PDFs of the Prezi presentations can be downloaded here.

Fair Use Victory in the Courts!

Lawrence Lessig - professor and author of several readings for this class - sued Liberation Media, the Australian music label that owns the rights to French band Phoenix' song “Lisztomania," and won! Here is the story, via Ars Technica: 

Last summer, Liberation had a video of one of Lessig's lectures (called "Open," which is embedded above) taken down when the company found that he had used video clips with Phoenix's music in it. Lessig, in collaboration with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, challenged the takedown and sued Liberation, arguing that he was well within his right to use Phoenix's music under fair use policies. (Phoenix, for its part, wrote that it was happy to have its music remixed under fair use principles.) 

Lessig teamed up with the Electronic Frontier Foundation to extract damages from Liberation under the DMCA's section 512(f), which requires copyright holders to pay damages if they overstep their bounds in issuing a takedown. As Ars noted last summer, hardly any copyright holders have ever had to pay damages under 512(f). 

Lessig's and EFF's original complaint against Liberation ran down a long list of reasons why the Phoenix clips in Lessig's lecture should be considered fair use. Ars wrote at the time: “[Lessig] used a small proportion of the song, his lecture doesn't compete with the market for the song in any way, and the lecture is an entirely new creation. Phoenix wanted its song to entertain and make money; Lessig's lecture was educational, and neither he nor Creative Commons, the sponsor, made any profit."

What is the significance of this ruling? Hopefully music labels will think twice before being over zealous in their take-down requests.  

Yikes...wouldn't recommend ever doing this!

Described as the "biggest Facebook mistake ever," a daughter’s status update cost her father an $80,000 legal settlement. Via Yahoo! Shine: 

According to the Miami Herald, Patrick Snay, 69, was the headmaster at Gulliver Preparatory School in Miami for several years, but in 2010, the school didn’t renew his contract. Snay sued his former employer for age discrimination and won a settlement of $80,000 in November 2011. The agreement contained a standard confidentiality clause, prohibiting Snay or the school from talking about the case. However, Snay’s daughter, Dana, now at Boston College and a part-time Starbucks barista, couldn’t resist bragging about the case on Facebook. “Mama and Papa Snay won the case against Gulliver,” she wrote. “Gulliver is now officially paying for my vacation to Europe this summer. SUCK IT.” 

As a result of the Facebook post, the Third District Court of Appeal tossed out the $80,000 settlement because, according to Judge Linda Ann Wells, “Snay violated the agreement by doing exactly what he had promised not to do...His daughter then did precisely what the confidentiality agreement was designed to prevent.”

Señor Snay could appeal the case to the Florida Supreme Court. But should he?

Update on the Aereo Case

From the NYT:

Aereo, the start-up that uses tiny antennas to stream the free signals of TV stations to its customers’ Internet-connected devices for a fee, is stealing from the broadcast networks on a giant scale, the broadcasters asserted in a filing with the Supreme Court on Monday.  

“The Copyright Act does not tolerate business models premised on the unauthorized exploitation of the copyrighted works of others,” said the brief, which was filed by broadcasters including ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox. 

On April 22, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear American Broadcasting Companies v. Aereo, a case that has significant implications for a television industry undergoing profound changes, as well as challenges from upstart competitors like Netflix and Amazon.

While Aereo is technically operating within the rule of law, the Court has acted in the past to try and preserve the broadcaster business model (see Turner Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission 1994). What do you think they will do with this case?

Copyright in the News: "Paramount Shoots Down 'Top Gun' Twitter Account"

Interesting/fun story about Twitter shutting down a Twitter account for its unauthorized sharing of screenshots of the movie "Top Gun." From Mashable: 

"Twitter user @555uhz decided that his love for Tom Cruise and fighter jets was best expressed by tweeting each scene of the movie, frame by frame. With each tweet, the entire plot was eventually revealed on the account's feed. Top Gun distributor Paramount Pictures issued a Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DCMA) letter to Twitter, which resulted in the account's suspension. The account, created in January, had gained more than 6,000 followers by the time it was taken down. The date and time of the suspension is unclear, but it most likely occurred within the last 24 hours."

Seems a bit drastic, no? It is just as likely that the unauthorized use of the material increased market demand for the actual movie itself, at least from a marketing perspective. What do you think? Should Twitter have complied with Paramount's request?

Symbolic Speech Prezi (and PDF)

(Link to download a PDF of the presentation)

Media Ownership Updates (Feb 23)

Hi Folks! I wanted to nudge you to keep on thinking about your term paper, due at the end of the semester, and worth 35% of your final grade. There have been quite a few stories relating to the topic in the news recently, and so I thought I'd flag a few of them for you. The proposed merger between Comcast and Time Warner Cable has sparked a lot of concern from other industry actors, as well as civil society groups. Here is a WSJ article on how it is shaking up the rest of the industry. Another WSJ  article suggests that the merger is actually giving net neutrality new life. This table, from the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, outlines how quickly cable provider profits have increased since the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (a 400% increase in annual revenue in 15 years!). This piece suggests that the merger super charges the development of new Google Fiber networks, possibly even here in Atlanta. And the NYT profiled Comcast's lobbying and philanthropic activities, suggesting that the merger's regulatory assessment may be shaped by political calculations.

Enjoy! See everyone on Monday! 

Test I Grades are posted.

Go here, and find your unique five-digit number to see how you did. This number reflects any extra credit and a 5% curve. (The curve is calculated by the difference between the best test score and 100%; in this case the test raw test grade was a 95%.)

Class average after the curve is 76.3%

See everyone next Monday!

Test grades will be up on Thursday (Feb 20).

I'll upload them to my grades webpage as soon as they come back from the testing center. The posted grade will include your actual test score, plus any curve I add to the test (typically I curve the difference between the best test grade and 100 percent) and any extra credit from the in class pop quiz on February 3.  

You'll need to keep the student ID number I assigned you (and handed to you) to determine your grade. So please hold on to those ID numbers! 

In the mean time, if you have any questions, please just let me know. Next week we'll cover symbolic expression, and I hope you have a chance to review the readings before we meet (Hopkins chapter 3). 

Media ownership in the news

As I'm sure you all heard, Comcast is trying to buy Time Warner. These two cable, internet and content providers are enormous, and the outcome of the merger will likely shape the landscape of American cable and internet services for years to come. Here is a great article about the risks of the merger, from Wired:

"If approved by federal regulators, the merger would reverberate through myriad markets beyond the cable TV, commercial broadband, and telephone industries. The deal could impact satellite TV, television programmers like ESPN and Fox, online video providers like Netflix and YouTube, and the massive networks at the very heart of the internet.

Announced this morning, the pact certainly makes sense for Comcast — already the nation’s largest cable provider — giving it far more power to compete in the rapidly changing communications world. The company expects to close the deal by the end of year. But because it affects so many industries, the merger of the nation’s two biggest cable outfits is sure to receive intense scrutiny from regulators. The government may even block the deal, as it did with the proposed merger between wireless phone service providers AT&T and T-Mobile in 2011."

What do you think? Should the FCC block the merger? Can they? Why is the merger good? To be discussed in class next week!

Great article on Netflix's rise & impact on the industry

From today's NYT:

"As a business, Netflix is gaining momentum and blowing through the stock market’s expectations. It has a market value of $26 billion, a share price that has more than doubled in the last year, and it now has 33.4 million subscribers in the United States, five million more than HBO has domestically. Early this month, Netflix borrowed $400 million to finance an aggressive expansion in Europe. “House of Cards” was one of the big stories in television last year, and its highly anticipated second season was released with much fanfare on Friday."

Great example of how competition is good for the consumer! 

Reminder: I'm available this week (via telephone) if you have questions

My office hours are typically on Tuesday, but since the university was closed on Tuesday, I wanted to remind folks that if you have questions, email me. I can try and help via email, or we can set up a phone call if you prefer. Either way, I'm here to help! 

Test is next Monday, February 17. 

Links to Lessig Readings are fixed, FYI.

Either head to my previous post or simply click here. Apologies for any inconvenience. 

Internet Policy & Regulation Prezi

Download a PDF of the lecture here. 

The Interesting Case of Aereo

I'm going to talk about Aereo in today's discussion of broadcast and cable regulations. Aereo is an innovative and disruptive company that exploits a loophole in copyright broadcast law to retransmit network programming to users via their personal computers. Here is a great article (via NYT) summarizing the company, the legal issues involved and what's at stake. 

If you have a chance, give the article a look before class. How do you think the court should decide?

Cable & Broadcast Regulations Prezi

PDF version here. 

Update & Readings

First, just wanted to say thank you for two terrific sessions so far this semester. I've had fun, and though we've stayed the entire time allotted, I hope you have found the course interesting and enjoyable. If you are having any trouble at all, or have questions, please reach out to me early so that I can be as helpful as possible. 

Second, as I pleaded yesterday, please please please buy your text book ASAP (if you haven't already). Follow the link from the syllabus page to buy it on Amazon, or check out the GSU bookstore. I strongly encourage you to read the assigned chapter or chapters before we discuss them in class. Reading ahead of class makes the content much easier to digest and understand, increasingly your ability to do well on the tests. I've taught this class for several years, and the most important variable in determining a student's grade is whether or not she/he read the text before the class lecture. 

Third, I wanted to post the assigned readings that are not included in the text book: Lessig 2002 and Lessig 1999. 

Our first test is a few weeks away (Feb 17) and will cover the introductory lecture and readings, copyright, broadcast and cable regulation and internet policy (Hopkins chapters 1, 2, 4, 7, 10, 11, 12 and the two Lessig readings posted above). 

Thanks, again, for a great start to the semester. Looking forward to next Monday. Stay warm! 

Copyright Prezi (Jan 27, 2014)

PDF version here. 

Prezi for "Introduction to Media Law" (Jan 13, 2014)

PDF version here. 

Welcome Spring 2014 Students!

Hello! Welcome to the website for Dr. Powers' J3060 course. We meet Mondays from 430-700 PM in Langdale 621. Check out the syllabus here and the class schedule here. The only required text for my class is Communication and the Law (2014). Go ahead and order it now so that you have it in time for the start of classes. I'm looking forward to a terrific semester with you all, and hope that you are too.