Interesting Upcoming Harvard JOLT Items

The other day, they hosted Howard Bashman (they should be posting video).  Jason just pointed out to me that they’re bringing none other than SCO‘s Darl McBride to campus on Feb 9, 2004.  And March 19-20, they are having a symposium entitled “Evolving Media: Emerging Digital Technologies and the Legal Response.”  If you’re in the area, these are definitely worth checking out – they should also be webcast.

Finally, you can access their newest journal at the end of the month.  Included in this issue:


  • Impose a Noncommercial Use Levy to Allow Free Peer-to-Peer File Sharing – Neil Weinstock Netanel
  • Modularity, Vertical Integration, And Open Access Policies: Towards A Convergence Of Antitrust And Regulation In The Internet Age – Joseph Farrell & Philip J. Weiser
  • Oasis or Mirage?: Efficient Breach as a Relief to the Burden of Contractual Recapture of Patent and Copyright Limitations – Daniel R. Cahoy
  • Nanotechnology and Regulatory Policy: Three Futures – Glenn Harlan Reynolds
  • Catch Me If You Can: Serving United States Process On An Elusive Defendant Abroad – Yvonne A. Tamayo
  • The Judicial Doctrine of Equivalents – Darcy August Paul


  • Note: Dormant Commerce Clause and the Internet — One Internet, One Law? — American Booksellers Foundation v. Dean, 342 F.3d 96 (2nd Cir. (Vt.))
  • Note: Trespass to Chattelsand the Internet: Right Answer? Wrong Question? Intel Corp. v. Hamidi, 1 Cal. Rptr. 3d 32 (2003) 
  • Note: The Future is Now — Control of the Aftermarket Through Copyright in Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc.

Aimster Case Finally Nearing an End

The Supreme Court denied cert to Aimster today (via Ernest).  As I’ve said before, I think this is good news.  We’ll see if they actually take it to trial.

Mod-Chippers Win in Italian DMCA Case

IP Justice reports: “In an important victory for Italian consumer rights, an Italian court has rejected the seizure of Sony Playstation game consoles that use modified chips to permit unauthorized uses of the game systems. The case is one of the first to be brought in Italy under the new European Union Copyright Directive (EUCD), which is modeled on the controversial US Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).”

The judge tells it like it is – Sony’s protections were not about preventing piracy, but about preventing competition, innovation, and consumer uses.  He makes a distinction between “machine sellers” and copyright holders under the Italian DMCA, affirming implicitly that copyright law wasn’t meant to protect the former in this way. (I don’t know the law well enough to say without further reading if he got it right.  See here for more on Italy’s DMCA.)