Tom Lachecki

Briefly exploring the world of the music business and how record labels don't tend to embrace on-demand access to music across the internet. Is the solution really to sit back and allow unfettered access to IP?

If it's immoral and illegal to send the latest episode of Heroes to your friend, the Pirate Bay ought to be at least partially responsible for facilitating that transaction.

The BBC reports, "a Mexican man whose case drew international attention has been executed in Texas for the rape and murder of a 16-year-old girl in 1993."

The Telegraph is reporting that "Britons flying to America could have their credit card and email accounts inspected by the United States authorities following a deal struck by Brussels and Washington."

Here's another example of the entertainment industry being stupid: claiming that they lose $244 million from the transfer of certain copyrighted material in China, and then in the same article admitting that the material in question isn't even available commercially in China. How can you lose out on potential sales, when there's no potential for sale?

After a year of operation, the DC++ filesharing hub running within the virtual walls of the University of Nottingham's internal residential network has been scared into closure by the owners of said network.

Down in Australia they've been looking at updating their copyright laws to catch up to the digital age (read: to make the laws more favorable for an entertainment industry that refuses to adjust to the market), but seem to be doing so in a way that pretty much guarantees the opposite would occur.

For those of you not already aware, the RIAA remains inexplicably unaware of any existing reason that they should not have total, uncontrolled access to the hard drive of a defendant accused of intellectual property violations.

I've gone on a couple of times about how the recording industry on the whole needs to get used to the idea that embracing the internet as a free medium is a positive thing.

After much ado recently about stupid patent applications and controversy over the actual purpose of the (US) patent system, the New York Times has come out in favour of what every sane person knows: patents are supposed to encourage innovation, not to prevent competition.