<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
 <rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:cc="http://web.resource.org/cc/" xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/">
  <channel rdf:about="http://pinboard.in">
    <title>Pinboard (Vaguery)</title>
    <link>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/public/</link>
    <description>recent bookmarks from Vaguery</description>
    <items>
      <rdf:Seq>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://writing.kemitchell.com/2022/01/06/Name-Functional-Specs.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2020/05/no-software-licence-will-save-you-from-hyperbolic-doubt/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://writing.kemitchell.com/2019/03/07/Blue-Oak-Council.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://blueoakcouncil.org/examples"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://blueoakcouncil.org/list"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://writing.kemitchell.com/2019/03/09/Deprecation-Notice.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.00771"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://sarahwerner.net/blog/index.php/2012/08/a-new-contributors-contact/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.piana.eu/laws"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.toomuchjoy.com/?p=1397"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://weblog.terrellrussell.com/2009/09/promises-and-privacy-of-self-disclosure-in-online-communities/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.yoursearchadvisor.com/blog/dissecting-the-google-analytics-tos/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://keepyourcopyrights.org/copyright/rights/work-for-hire"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.stopworkforhire.com/site2/why-work-for-hire-hurts/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/06/21/start_ups_stifled_by_noncompetes/?page=2"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.steamthing.com/2009/02/moral-rights-vs-workforhire.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.taunton.com/finehomebuilding/how-to/departments/commentary/a-contract-that-makes-everybody-happy.aspx"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/oclcreply"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://scrawford.net/blog/icann-tuesday-4/1278/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2008/10/co-inventors-co.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://consumerist.com/5034315/which-credit-cards-have-the-best-rental-car-insurance"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://richardsbraindump.blogspot.com/2007/09/fixed-price-contracts-and-agile.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.copycense.com/2007/06/the_fantasy_of__1.html"/>
      </rdf:Seq>
    </items>
  </channel><item rdf:about="https://writing.kemitchell.com/2022/01/06/Name-Functional-Specs.html">
    <title>What Do We Call Functional Specs for Legal Forms? — /dev/lawyer</title>
    <dc:date>2022-05-22T12:07:35+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://writing.kemitchell.com/2022/01/06/Name-Functional-Specs.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Paired with a database of sections that actually implement each kind of component, we could use these lists like recipes. A computer could give users their pick of specific language options for each component, like a grocery store offering different brands and flavors for each ingredient. In pulling together an NDA, you might choose a definition of “Confidential Information” that does or does not require marking and written confirmation. You might choose a return-and-destruction component that does or doesn’t require certification of destruction after the agreement ends.
I think these kinds of lists could be an especially amenable to online collaboration, since they’re both conceptually straightforward and easy to type. Fundamentally, they’re just text files with a title at the top and a list of components after. The only tricky part would be making sure that lines in the lists correspond to labels in the database of drafted sections, if the two are going to work together.
]]></description>
<dc:subject>law contracts rather-interesting specification consider:testing</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:6452770b59cc/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:rather-interesting"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:specification"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:consider:testing"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2020/05/no-software-licence-will-save-you-from-hyperbolic-doubt/">
    <title>No software licence will save you from hyperbolic doubt – Terence Eden’s Blog</title>
    <dc:date>2022-02-13T13:49:44+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2020/05/no-software-licence-will-save-you-from-hyperbolic-doubt/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[How do you know your computer isn't lying to you? Open source code means that you can see the code your computer runs. Of course, the compiled code may be different from what's published.

Do we trust verifiable build? Perhaps not.

OK, so we compiler our own code.

But do we trust our compiler? Same problem as above.

Let's write our own compiler!

But what if there's a secret chip in our computer inserting malicious code? Argh!

It's malicious demons all the way down. But, at least, we can see the code and compare it against the binary code and compare that to the output of the computer. That's a fairly reasonable way to dispel doubt.

Hurrah for open source licences!

But what about code that runs on someone else's server?

How can you tell what a distant computer is doing with your data? There are some Open Source Licences which are specifically for servers:

]]></description>
<dc:subject>opennes open-source licensing the-enforceable-and-the-lame contracts</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:474df311e450/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:opennes"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:open-source"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:licensing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:the-enforceable-and-the-lame"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://writing.kemitchell.com/2019/03/07/Blue-Oak-Council.html">
    <title>/dev/lawyer Blue Oak Council</title>
    <dc:date>2019-05-01T10:52:08+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://writing.kemitchell.com/2019/03/07/Blue-Oak-Council.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[I’m very happy to announce of Blue Oak Council, a new organization for which I’m inaugural executive director. The Council’s website, blueoakcouncil.org, spells out its mission:
Blue Oak Council opens the software commons up to those who can’t find or afford specialized legal help by bringing experienced lawyer-technologists together to publish free, practical materials about software licenses.
]]></description>
<dc:subject>open-source licensing law to-understand contracts</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:aa5f31c2bcba/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:open-source"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:licensing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:to-understand"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://blueoakcouncil.org/examples">
    <title>Blue Oak Council Examples</title>
    <dc:date>2019-04-14T12:25:15+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://blueoakcouncil.org/examples</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[This page links to example language showing how contracts, policies, and other documents can reference the Blue Oak Council’s license list and model license to set rules about software licensing.

]]></description>
<dc:subject>law contracts worklife open-access consulting rather-interesting</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:7637ad51124b/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:worklife"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:open-access"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:consulting"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:rather-interesting"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://blueoakcouncil.org/list">
    <title>Blue Oak Council License List</title>
    <dc:date>2019-04-14T12:19:17+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://blueoakcouncil.org/list</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Permissive licenses are the bread and butter of software development: simple, effective, and on just about everyone’s “go” list. But most information about free and open source software focuses on other, more complex licenses. The Council publishes this list to identify permissive licenses, so that everyone can recognize, rely on, and use them without expensive legal help.

]]></description>
<dc:subject>law licensing open-source contracts law-as-code rather-interesting</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:1606ba0d852b/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:licensing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:open-source"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law-as-code"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:rather-interesting"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://writing.kemitchell.com/2019/03/09/Deprecation-Notice.html">
    <title>/dev/lawyer Deprecation Notice: MIT and BSD</title>
    <dc:date>2019-03-15T11:00:53+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://writing.kemitchell.com/2019/03/09/Deprecation-Notice.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[MIT and BSD open source licenses are well known, popular, and legally deprecated. They served long and well, but they’re older than many open source software developers, and haven’t been maintained.
With licenses like Blue Oak available, it’s time open source upgraded from academic forms of the ’80s. There are good social, practical, and especially legal reasons to do so.
]]></description>
<dc:subject>intellectual-property contracts license open-source software-development-is-not-programming to-understand</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:7d484cee8f93/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:intellectual-property"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:license"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:open-source"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:software-development-is-not-programming"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:to-understand"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.00771">
    <title>[1608.00771] Smart Contract Templates: foundations, design landscape and research directions</title>
    <dc:date>2017-05-07T12:21:29+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.00771</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[In this position paper, we consider some foundational topics regarding smart contracts (such as terminology, automation, enforceability, and semantics) and define a smart contract as an automatable and enforceable agreement. We explore a simple semantic framework for smart contracts, covering both operational and non-operational aspects, and describe templates and agreements for legally-enforceable smart contracts, based on legal documents. Building upon the Ricardian Contract, we identify operational parameters in the legal documents and use these to connect legal agreements to standardised code. We also explore the design landscape, including increasing sophistication of parameters, increasing use of common standardised code, and long-term research.
]]></description>
<dc:subject>law contracts to-write-about formalization ontology software-development-is-not-programming law-is-not-code-writing</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:289abaa3c03d/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:to-write-about"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:formalization"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:ontology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:software-development-is-not-programming"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law-is-not-code-writing"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://sarahwerner.net/blog/index.php/2012/08/a-new-contributors-contact/">
    <title>a new contributor’s contact! » Wynken de Worde</title>
    <dc:date>2013-01-13T15:32:04+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://sarahwerner.net/blog/index.php/2012/08/a-new-contributors-contact/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[And one plea to all of you: Ask for what’s in your right to have. Please do this. And please tell us about doing this. Scholarly publishing is in a world of change right now, and we are all finding our way. My experience is that most publishers are finding their ways just as much as most authors are. The more we work together and share our experiences, the more chance we all have of finding a fair way forward.

]]></description>
<dc:subject>for-aaronsw intellectual-property academic-culture publishing contracts advice openness open-access</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:326b52bc9d6c/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:for-aaronsw"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:intellectual-property"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:academic-culture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:publishing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:advice"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:openness"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:open-access"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.piana.eu/laws">
    <title>A modest proposal to give Free Software equal legal standing as proprietary. | Carlo Piana :: Law is Freedom ::</title>
    <dc:date>2012-01-03T12:52:05+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.piana.eu/laws</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Laws are more often than not an annoyance, despite their aim to improve the legal framework in any given field. Free Software (AKA "Open Source") has thrieved despite the absence of any legal recognition by the law, if not in spite of rules that clearly are shaped around proprietary software. In many jurisdictions it has passed the enforceability test. So, no laws seem necessary to make it work. Yet, can some legal principle be put forward, and included in some laws, to help?]]></description>
<dc:subject>via:Glyn-Moody licensing law contracts modest-proposals</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:68d14da72f9c/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:via:Glyn-Moody"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:licensing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:modest-proposals"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.toomuchjoy.com/?p=1397">
    <title>Too Much Joy» Blog Archive » My Hilarious Warner Bros. Royalty Statement</title>
    <dc:date>2009-12-03T00:34:12+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.toomuchjoy.com/?p=1397</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["I mean, we all know that major labels are supposed to be venal masters of hiding money from artists, but they’re also supposed to be good at it, right? This figure wasn’t insulting because it was so small, it was insulting because it was so stupid."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>via:arsyed recording-industry contracts finance business startup-culture-must-die corporations intellectual-property disintermediation-targets</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:c2e3868bdd17/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:via:arsyed"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:recording-industry"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:finance"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:business"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:startup-culture-must-die"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:corporations"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:intellectual-property"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:disintermediation-targets"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://weblog.terrellrussell.com/2009/09/promises-and-privacy-of-self-disclosure-in-online-communities/">
    <title>Terrell Russell: This Old Network : Promises and Privacy of Self-Disclosure in Online Communities</title>
    <dc:date>2009-09-15T14:54:13+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://weblog.terrellrussell.com/2009/09/promises-and-privacy-of-self-disclosure-in-online-communities/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["I just read the most plausible of law review papers suggesting the potential for protection of a private space within social network sites (SNS). Fellow UNC grad student Woodrow Hartzog proposes the use of Promissory Estoppel as a means to protect self-disclosure in online communities. It would create a type of contract or agreement between users of a site whereby a protection would exist for information disclosed in that community or site. If someone else shares the disclosed, private information, with a few caveats, they can be held accountable."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>privacy terms-of-service information-sharing personal-brand estoppel law contracts social-engineering</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:36b13346cc12/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:privacy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:terms-of-service"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:information-sharing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:personal-brand"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:estoppel"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:social-engineering"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.yoursearchadvisor.com/blog/dissecting-the-google-analytics-tos/">
    <title>Dissecting the Google Analytics TOS — Your Search Advisor, LLC</title>
    <dc:date>2009-09-08T00:52:00+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.yoursearchadvisor.com/blog/dissecting-the-google-analytics-tos/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["I have signed up for multiple GA accounts and never took the time to read the TOS until now. Like any legal document, it’s dry and at times full of legalese and formality. Here’s what you need to know…in plain English (emphasis and italicized comments are mine):"
]]></description>
<dc:subject>Google analytics web-analytics terms-of-service TOS contracts legal lawyers sure-I-agree-whatever</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:fc5a88462c31/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Google"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:analytics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:web-analytics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:terms-of-service"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:TOS"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:legal"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:lawyers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:sure-I-agree-whatever"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://keepyourcopyrights.org/copyright/rights/work-for-hire">
    <title>Works Made For Hire - Keep Your Copyrights</title>
    <dc:date>2009-08-13T00:10:21+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://keepyourcopyrights.org/copyright/rights/work-for-hire</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["If there is no signed written agreement, then the work isn’t for hire, and you start out with all the rights. If there is a written agreement, it should be entered into before you create the work. Beware of after-the-fact attempts to take away your rights by calling the work “for hire,” for example by sending you a check whose endorsement line says that your signature is your agreement that the work was for hire."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>work-for-hire law contracts intellectual-property independent not-an-employee freelancing copyright contractor disintermediation-targets</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:819724ff8709/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:work-for-hire"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:intellectual-property"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:independent"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:not-an-employee"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:freelancing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:copyright"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contractor"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:disintermediation-targets"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.stopworkforhire.com/site2/why-work-for-hire-hurts/">
    <title>Why work-for-hire hurts | StopWorkForHire.com</title>
    <dc:date>2009-08-13T00:08:22+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.stopworkforhire.com/site2/why-work-for-hire-hurts/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["Why work-for-hire is hurting the creative industry"
]]></description>
<dc:subject>work-for-hire contracts independence not-an-employee law disintermediation-targets business-model</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:4157ac92da22/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:work-for-hire"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:independence"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:not-an-employee"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:disintermediation-targets"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:business-model"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/06/21/start_ups_stifled_by_noncompetes/?page=2">
    <title>Start-ups stifled by noncompetes - The Boston Globe</title>
    <dc:date>2009-06-22T12:54:30+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/06/21/start_ups_stifled_by_noncompetes/?page=2</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["Oddly, certain kinds of workers in Massachusetts cannot be shackled by noncompetes: doctors, social workers, and broadcasters among them. But why should a TV anchor be allowed to jump from one station to another, while we make an EMC engineer take a year of unpaid leave before he can form a new company? How does that benefit our economy? My biggest concern is that new legislation only requires noncompetes to be “reasonable,’’ rather than nixing them entirely. To ensure that we get there, individual employees will have to dive in to this debate - rather than leaving it to big companies who know how to lobby. And CEOs who are willing to think about the good of the state’s economy - beyond their own firm’s desire to avoid spawning potential rivals - should speak up."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>via:vielmetti contracts independence Workantile law innovation flexibility Pragmatism burden</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:b9e162d818d7/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:via:vielmetti"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:independence"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Workantile"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:innovation"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:flexibility"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Pragmatism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:burden"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.steamthing.com/2009/02/moral-rights-vs-workforhire.html">
    <title>Steamboats Are Ruining Everything: Moral rights vs. work-for-hire</title>
    <dc:date>2009-02-24T12:41:17+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.steamthing.com/2009/02/moral-rights-vs-workforhire.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["American law does not similarly protect the moral rights of its authors. In fact, it has a legal convention called "work-for-hire" that is to moral rights what peonage is to citizenship. If you sign a contract with a "work-for-hire" clause, you agree that what you've written is a thing without any more integrity than a lump of coal, and that the purchaser can do whatever he wants to it, editorially, without any need to consult you, and that no matter how much or under what circumstances the work is republished, you have no rights to demand further payment. In my opinion, work-for-hire contracts are disreputable acts of force majeure on the part of publishers. Nonetheless, it is almost impossible for a novice writer to avoid signing them, and in the last few years, it has been difficult even for established writers to avoid them..."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>work-for-hire contracts collaboration lawyers business-culture moral-rights copyright makers</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:934249539868/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:work-for-hire"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:collaboration"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:lawyers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:business-culture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:moral-rights"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:copyright"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:makers"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.taunton.com/finehomebuilding/how-to/departments/commentary/a-contract-that-makes-everybody-happy.aspx">
    <title>A contract that makes everybody happy - Fine Homebuilding Article</title>
    <dc:date>2009-01-06T13:12:39+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.taunton.com/finehomebuilding/how-to/departments/commentary/a-contract-that-makes-everybody-happy.aspx</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["With cost plus a fixed fee, the client signs a contract for the $60,000 plus the cost of construction, which is priced at the builder’s actual out-of-pocket cost. Whether the house costs $350,000 or $500,000, the client still pays $60,000 for the builder’s overhead and profit.

The advantages are obvious. If the cost exceeds the estimate, the builder isn’t making a fatter fee. Getting the job done and moving on to another one will be to his advantage. However, the builder will not be taking such a bath that he is likely to walk off the job or go bankrupt, a real risk for smaller builders."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>sprawlette builder contracts owner-builder construction law business-culture</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:73f40b4e3776/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:sprawlette"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:builder"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:owner-builder"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:construction"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:business-culture"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/oclcreply">
    <title>OCLC on the Run (Aaron Swartz's Raw Thought)</title>
    <dc:date>2008-11-15T21:40:11+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/oclcreply</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["[WorldCat rep] insists that "OCLC welcomes collaboration with Open Library", which seems a funny way of putting it. As I said last time, they've played hardball: trying to cut off our funding, hurt our reputation, and pressure libraries not to cooperate. When we tried to make a deal with them, they dragged their feet for months, pretended to come to terms, and then had their lawyers send us an "agreement" to sign that would require we take all OCLC-related records off our site."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>WorldCat OCLC monopoly openness open-access catalogues bad business-culture licensing contracts controversy not-really-nonprofit-if-you-count-intellectual-property</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:988671396aee/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:WorldCat"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:OCLC"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:monopoly"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:openness"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:open-access"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:catalogues"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:bad"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:business-culture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:licensing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:controversy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:not-really-nonprofit-if-you-count-intellectual-property"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://scrawford.net/blog/icann-tuesday-4/1278/">
    <title>ICANN Tuesday | Susan Crawford blog</title>
    <dc:date>2008-11-06T12:26:10+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://scrawford.net/blog/icann-tuesday-4/1278/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["ICANN recently has wanted to make a lot of changes to its standard Registrar Accreditation Agreement.  It found that it was was constrained by an even earlier version of the consensus policy process idea, and has found this frustrating.  So it wants the flexibility to make changes without going through a policy process, and it’s (initially) saying that although those changes can be overridden in some ways they will automatically become effective if they are *not* overridden."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>ICANN Internet domain registration power centralization bureaucracy contracts licensing law</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:1eed69dfe5c6/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:ICANN"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Internet"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:domain"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:registration"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:power"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:centralization"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:bureaucracy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:licensing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2008/10/co-inventors-co.html">
    <title>Patent Law Blog (Patently-O): Co-Inventors Contribution Must Be “More Than The Exercise of Ordinary Skill”</title>
    <dc:date>2008-10-28T19:33:47+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2008/10/co-inventors-co.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["Correcting Inventorship: An issued patent is presumed to name the correct inventors. Thus, an inventorship challenge must bring "clear and convincing evidence" that the newly surfaced inventor "contributed to the conception of the claimed invention." "Simply reducing to practice that which has been conceived by others is insufficient for co-inventorship." Under the clear and convincing standard, the inventorship challenge "must be corroborated by independent evidence.""
]]></description>
<dc:subject>intellectual-property patents engineering collaboration law contracts CoScience rights</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:85ee5b7c9397/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:intellectual-property"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:patents"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:engineering"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:collaboration"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:CoScience"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:rights"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://consumerist.com/5034315/which-credit-cards-have-the-best-rental-car-insurance">
    <title>Rental Insurance: Which Credit Cards Have The Best Rental Car Insurance?</title>
    <dc:date>2008-08-10T11:55:19+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://consumerist.com/5034315/which-credit-cards-have-the-best-rental-car-insurance</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><dc:subject>travel rental credit-cards policy contracts comparison</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:5f6b60bc16c4/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:travel"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:rental"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:credit-cards"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:comparison"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://richardsbraindump.blogspot.com/2007/09/fixed-price-contracts-and-agile.html">
    <title>Richard's Braindump: Fixed Price Contracts and Agile Delivery</title>
    <dc:date>2007-09-10T21:48:45+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://richardsbraindump.blogspot.com/2007/09/fixed-price-contracts-and-agile.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["The firm figured that they'd do what they could within the strict terms of the initial contract and then pick up extra time through massive overestimation on change requests."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>agility planning accounting business-plan contracting fixed-price contracts control</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:54f2cff1ee7e/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:agility"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:planning"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:accounting"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:business-plan"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracting"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:fixed-price"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:control"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.copycense.com/2007/06/the_fantasy_of__1.html">
    <title>Copycense: The Fantasy of Fair Use, Part 2</title>
    <dc:date>2007-06-19T12:49:48+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.copycense.com/2007/06/the_fantasy_of__1.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><dc:subject>fair-use copyright law intellectual-property legal academia contracts</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:f8410314347f/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:fair-use"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:copyright"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:intellectual-property"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:legal"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:contracts"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>