<?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://www.technollama.co.uk/should-there-be-copyright-protection-for-artificial-intelligence-works"/>
	<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://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr/vol83/iss1/2/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/14/17117160/spotify-mechanical-license-copyright-wixen-explainer"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://adactio.com/journal/13364"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.pelicancrossing.net/netwars/2018/01/bodies_in_the_clouds.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://medium.com/space-anthropology/diversity-is-a-dangerous-set-up-8cee942e7f22"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://incarceratedworkers.org/news/destroy-all-prisons-tomorrow"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.00771"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2017/01/18093/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://techliberation.com/2014/08/06/you-know-how-ip-creates-millions-of-jobs-thats-pseudoscientific-baloney/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://boingboing.net/2013/03/02/americas-six-strikes-copyrig.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012082510525390"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://blogs.publishersweekly.com/blogs/PWxyz/2012/04/14/serving-a-public-that-knows-how-to-copy-orphan-works-and-mass-digitization/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.piana.eu/laws"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopica87.pdf"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopica88.pdf"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopica96.pdf"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicb80.pdf"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicb99.pdf"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopico86.pdf"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicj03.pdf"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopice94.pdf"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicg92.pdf"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopici03.pdf"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopick03.pdf"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/07/its-back-wipo-broadcasting-treaty-returns-grave"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.biofortified.org/2011/05/private-nonprofit-foundations-public-health-potential-conflicts-of-interest-in-corporate-links/?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ResearchBloggingAllEnglish+%28Research+Blogging+-+English+-+All+Topics%29"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-heads-norwegian-domain-blocking-list-110520/?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed:+Torrentfreak+(Torrentfreak)&amp;utm_content=Google+Reader"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://weblogs.swarthmore.edu/burke/2010/09/30/crime-and-punishment/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://seekingalpha.com/article/208748-bp-the-mother-of-all-egregious-violators?source=feed"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.google.com/googlebooks/uspto.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2010/04/caveat-emptor-is-not-a-business-plan.html?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+EconomistsView+(Economist's+View+(EconomistsView))"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2010/04/the-two-issues-to-watch-on-financial-reform.html?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+EconomistsView+(Economist's+View+(EconomistsView))"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20031214210634851"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/sexandgender/2410/why_won%E2%80%99t_conservatives_call_gay-bashing_a_hate_crime/?page=2"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/copyrightforlibrarians/Main_Page"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2010/03/dr-michelson-supports-patent-reform.html?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PatentlyO+(Patently-O%3A+Patent+Law+Blog)"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2010/03/aiding-and-abetting-the-enemy/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/cfpa-ii-some-additional-thoughts/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://piratasum.com/the-canadian-privacy-commissioner-vs-the-face"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/12/ny-times-recession-cases-flooding.html?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CalculatedRisk+(Calculated+Risk)"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://grammatically.blogspot.com/2009/12/list-of-links-for-lawyers-among-us.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/144740/al_franken's_anti-rape_amendment_passes,_infuriating_several_(male)_republicans/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/12/i_cant_see_it_olympia.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://computationallegalstudies.com/2009/11/05/hustle-and-flow-a-social-network-analysis-of-the-american-federal-judiciary-repost-from-325/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://futurismic.com/2009/11/06/the-anonymous-hunters-corporate-critics-and-whistleblowers-beware/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/11-02-09.htm#publicgood"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/movabletype/archives/2009/06/future_trends_f_1.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.boingboing.net/2009/10/30/oregon-once-again-cl.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.trademarkia.com/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://weblog.terrellrussell.com/2009/09/promises-and-privacy-of-self-disclosure-in-online-communities/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2009/09/do-corporations-have-a-right-to-free-speech.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=577244"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.theengineer.co.uk/Articles/312772/Autonomous+machines+prompt+debate.htm?nl=TE_NL&amp;dep=webops&amp;dte=210809"/>
	<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.thevalve.org/go/valve/article/colorado_judge_mugs_churchill/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.onthecommons.org/content.php?id=2462"/>
	<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://diveintomark.org/archives/2009/03/21/accessibility-is-a-harsh-mistress"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.automatinginvention.com/archives/2009/05/easing_the_pate.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://consumerist.com/5256508/food-companies-our-food-probably-isnt-safe-enough-for-your-microwave-good-luck"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.publicdomainsherpa.com/index.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Public_domain"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://computationallegalstudies.com/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://tapr.org/ohl.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://www.technollama.co.uk/should-there-be-copyright-protection-for-artificial-intelligence-works">
    <title>Should there be copyright protection for artificial intelligence works? – TechnoLlama</title>
    <dc:date>2019-10-13T11:34:40+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.technollama.co.uk/should-there-be-copyright-protection-for-artificial-intelligence-works</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Interestingly, there is an ongoing debate on this subject, as various scholars have made their positions clear on the subject, with three clear positions emerging:

The default position, and the one that seems to have more scholarly support, is that there is no copyright because there cannot be originality in a work that has not been created by a human, and without originality there is no copyright.
As mentioned, I advocate for a legislative declarative approach similar to that in UK law, where the question of authorship is solved by simply allocating authorship to whoever made arrangements for the work to come into being.

A third option, which emerged mostly from a series Japanese strategy policy papers on the subject, would be to bypass copyright altogether and provide a new type of right for AI creators, this sui generis right could be something akin to the European database right, and it would be something that would protect investment. These proposals haven’t been implemented.

]]></description>
<dc:subject>law copyright philosophy-of-engineering rather-interesting creativity licensing ownership to-watch</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:b4b45e3a827b/</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:copyright"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:philosophy-of-engineering"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:rather-interesting"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:creativity"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:licensing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:ownership"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:to-watch"/>
</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://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr/vol83/iss1/2/">
    <title>&quot;Created Facts and the Flawed Ontology of Copyright Law&quot; by Justin Hughes</title>
    <dc:date>2018-12-30T18:25:32+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr/vol83/iss1/2/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[It is black letter doctrine that facts are not copyrightable: facts are discovered, not created—so they will always lack the originality needed for copyright protection. As straightforward as this reasoning seems, it is fundamentally flawed. Using the “social facts” theory of philosopher John Searle, this Article explores a variety of “created facts” cases—designation systems, systematic evaluations, and privately written laws—in which original expression from private individuals is adopted by social convention and generates facts in our social reality. In the course of this discussion, the paper places facts in their historical and philosophical context, explores how courts conflate facts with expressions of fact, and explains the difference between social facts created by expression and the “facts” of literature and fiction. Having established that the copyrighted works discussed in these cases produce facts, the question arises whether copyright's merger doctrine eliminates the copyright protection—a result that is both seemingly harsh and seemingly necessary. This Article proposes a recalibration of the merger doctrine to acknowledge that “created facts” are a unique situation in which the incentive of copyright is needed not just to generate the expression, but also needed to generate the facts. Reprinted by permission of the publisher.
]]></description>
<dc:subject>law pragmatism philosophy rather-interesting to-understand</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:9a8ff289166c/</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:pragmatism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:philosophy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:rather-interesting"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:to-understand"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/14/17117160/spotify-mechanical-license-copyright-wixen-explainer">
    <title>A $1.6 billion Spotify lawsuit is based on a law made for player pianos - The Verge</title>
    <dc:date>2018-03-15T11:11:01+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/14/17117160/spotify-mechanical-license-copyright-wixen-explainer</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[So, what happened here? Did Spotify really fail to pay artists to the tune of a billion dollars all the while losing money? Is digital streaming just a black hole that sucks up money and spits it out into the cold vacuum of space?

SPOTIFY IS FUNDAMENTALLY BEING SUED FOR LITERAL PAPERWORK

The answer is complicated. The amount of money that songwriters are making through streaming services like Spotify is oddly low, but the Wixen lawsuit itself exists in a bizarre universe of convoluted legal provisions that have very little bearing to fairness, common sense, or even how the technology actually works. And as Spotify’s IPO filing notes in its section on risk factors, the company is dependent on third-party licenses, which makes its business model especially vulnerable to any hiccups in the bureaucracy of music licensing.]]></description>
<dc:subject>copyright law explanation rather-interesting doom</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:1f273240b8a3/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<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:explanation"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:rather-interesting"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:doom"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://adactio.com/journal/13364">
    <title>Adactio: Journal—GDPR and Google Analytics</title>
    <dc:date>2018-02-04T13:34:57+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://adactio.com/journal/13364</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[In the second scenario, you don’t do anything differently than before—you just add that single line of JavaScript. But now that script would need to launch the interface for getting consent before doing any tracking. Google Analytics would go from being something invisible to something that directly impacts the user experience of your site.
I’m just using Google Analytics as an example here because it’s so widespread. This also applies to third-party sharing buttons—Twitter, Facebook, etc.—and of course, advertising.
In the case of advertising, it gets even thornier because quite often, the site owner has no idea which third party is about to do the tracking. Many, many sites use intermediary services (y’know, ‘cause bloated ad scripts aren’t slowing down sites enough so let’s throw some just-in-time bidding into the mix too). You could get consent for the intermediary service, but not for the final advert—neither you nor your site’s user would have any idea what they were consenting to.
Interesting times. One way or another, a massive amount of the web—every website using Google Analytics, embedded YouTube videos, Facebook comments, embedded tweets, or third-party advertisements—will be liable under GDPR.
]]></description>
<dc:subject>analytics privacy law to-understand web-design</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:96ab1929bae1/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:analytics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:privacy"/>
	<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:web-design"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.pelicancrossing.net/netwars/2018/01/bodies_in_the_clouds.html">
    <title>net.wars: Bodies in the clouds</title>
    <dc:date>2018-01-28T15:42:11+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.pelicancrossing.net/netwars/2018/01/bodies_in_the_clouds.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[A friend who buys and turns on an Amazon Echo is deemed to have accepted its privacy policy. Does visiting their home mean I've accepted it too? What happens to data about me that the Echo has collected if I am not a suspect? And if it controls their whole house, how do I get it to work after they've gone to bed?

At Privacy Law Scholars in 2016, Andrea Matwyshyn introduced a new idea: the Internet of Bodies, the theme of this year's CPDP. As she spotted then, the Internet of Bodies make us dependent for our bodily integrity and ability to function on this hybrid ecosystem. At that first discussion of what I'm sure will be an important topic for many years to come, someone commented, "A pancreas has never reported to the cloud before."

A few weeks ago, a small American ISP sent a letter to warn a copyright-infringing subscriber that continuing to attract complaints would cause the ISP to throttle their bandwidth, potentially interfering with devices requiring continuous connections, such as CCTV monitoring and thermostats. The kind of conflict this suggests - copyright laws designed for "cyberspace" touching our physical ability to stay warm and alive in a cold snap - is what awaits us now.

]]></description>
<dc:subject>net-neutrality public-policy law networked-world essay</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:1fd07424cdb2/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:net-neutrality"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:networked-world"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:essay"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://medium.com/space-anthropology/diversity-is-a-dangerous-set-up-8cee942e7f22">
    <title>Diversity is a Dangerous Set-up – Space + Anthropology – Medium</title>
    <dc:date>2018-01-26T03:07:38+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://medium.com/space-anthropology/diversity-is-a-dangerous-set-up-8cee942e7f22</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[It is in this context that I state: I am against diversity as an industry and as an ideological ideal because I think it is the wrong central tenet to operate from. The correct central tenet, in my opinion, is equity, which is established in the supreme law of the United States (the Constitution) as the Equal Protection Clause. For me, the Equal Protection Clause gains this central status through an interpretation that Owen Fiss frames as the antisubordination school of thought, which is that the law should not “aggravate” or “perpetuate . . . the subordinate status of a specially disadvantaged group.” (Kahn, p. 2) The antisubordination school of thought arises in the context of discourse about how to effectively use the law to redress historical injustices, and it specifically posits that the idea of “protected classes” such as racial minorities and women is in fact consistent with the Equal Protection Clause.
]]></description>
<dc:subject>racism public-policy law define-your-terms social-norms framing letter-and-spirit history-is-a-feature-not-a-bug</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:50cd8dd3032f/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:racism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:define-your-terms"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:social-norms"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:framing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:letter-and-spirit"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:history-is-a-feature-not-a-bug"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://incarceratedworkers.org/news/destroy-all-prisons-tomorrow">
    <title>Destroy All Prisons Tomorrow | Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee</title>
    <dc:date>2017-09-02T13:32:58+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://incarceratedworkers.org/news/destroy-all-prisons-tomorrow</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Both Lancaster’s article and the abolitionist's response reference efforts to abolish chattel slavery, but neither acknowledge the most important historical event from that time: the Civil War. The southern plantation system was not and could not have been converted into a humane system of rehabilitative discipline as Lancaster suggests, nor could it have been abolished by a steady campaign of “non-reformist” policy changes chipping at it. To suggest either response to the present system of mass incarceration and prison slavery is equally absurd, yet these are the only things being discussed in Jacobin.

The abolitionists of the 1800s certainly engaged in legislation and policy change, and their contemporaries certainly countered with visions of a kinder gentler plantation, but history was in fact made by those who engaged in acts that forced change on a nation unwilling to depart from its racist history. It was the underground railroad, the harboring of freed slaves, and the support for uprisings, sabotage and rebellions which compelled Lincoln to sign the emancipation proclamation. It took the bloodiest war in US history to enforce that proclamation. This discussion about “how to end mass incarceration” that does not include forcibly overcoming the violent persistence of white terror and black captivity in the united states is completely out of touch.]]></description>
<dc:subject>prisons Civil-War public-policy law American-cultural-assumptions abolition</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:5a05da5f20d3/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:prisons"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Civil-War"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:American-cultural-assumptions"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:abolition"/>
</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://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2017/01/18093/">
    <title>That Time I Turned a Routine Traffic Ticket into the Constitutional Trial of the Century | Public Discourse</title>
    <dc:date>2017-01-28T13:15:37+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2017/01/18093/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Traffic-camera laws seem like such minor, insignificant intrusions on liberty that few grasp their constitutional significance. But they reflect a profoundly mistaken view of American constitutionalism. One might say that the traffic camera is a sign of our times. Its widespread use and acceptance reveals how far we have drifted from our fundamental commitment to self-government. When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

]]></description>
<dc:subject>law rights fascism constitutionality</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:63a99fd1f15a/</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:rights"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:fascism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:constitutionality"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://techliberation.com/2014/08/06/you-know-how-ip-creates-millions-of-jobs-thats-pseudoscientific-baloney/">
    <title>You know how IP creates millions of jobs? That’s pseudoscientific baloney</title>
    <dc:date>2014-08-15T22:23:36+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://techliberation.com/2014/08/06/you-know-how-ip-creates-millions-of-jobs-thats-pseudoscientific-baloney/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[In the past two years, a spate of misleading reports on intellectual property has sought to convince policymakers and the public that implausibly high proportions of US output and employment depend on expansive intellectual property (IP) rights. These reports provide no theoretical or empirical evidence to support such a claim, but instead simply assume that the existence of intellectual property in an industry creates the jobs in that industry. We dispute the assumption that jobs in IP-intensive industries are necessarily IP-created jobs. We first explore issues regarding job creation and the economic efficiency of IP that cut across all kinds of intellectual property. We then take a closer look at these issues across three major forms of intellectual property: trademarks, patents, and copyrights.

]]></description>
<dc:subject>intellectual-property public-policy law</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:afd8df5eb599/</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:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://boingboing.net/2013/03/02/americas-six-strikes-copyrig.html">
    <title>America's six-strikes copyright system is a nightmare - Boing Boing</title>
    <dc:date>2013-03-03T13:59:16+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://boingboing.net/2013/03/02/americas-six-strikes-copyrig.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Most immediately, it also requires its victims to complete an online copyright re-education camp designed by the major record labels and studios, and as EFF's Corynne McSherry points out, this is a total clusterpoop, a way of ramming inaccurate copyright information into the nation's eyeballs. Unsurprisingly, the gross errors in the mandatory copyright reeducation materials would all improve the profitability of the entertainment industry if they were taken to heart by the public.]]></description>
<dc:subject>copyright public-policy foxes-and-henhouses law</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:772ac98f4740/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:copyright"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:foxes-and-henhouses"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012082510525390">
    <title>Groklaw - Jury in Apple v. Samsung Goofed, Damages Reduced -- Uh Oh. What's Wrong With this Picture? ~pj Updated 4Xs</title>
    <dc:date>2012-08-27T13:06:34+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012082510525390</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["If it would take a lawyer three days to make sure he understood the terms in the form, how did the jury not need the time to do the same? There were 700 questions, remember, and one thing is plain, that the jury didn't take the time to avoid inconsistencies, one of which resulted in the jury casually throwing numbers around, like $2 million dollars for a nonfringement.

Come on. This is farce."]]></description>
<dc:subject>patents law emperors-new-patent-portfolio</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:e88de2e3c98d/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:patents"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:emperors-new-patent-portfolio"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://blogs.publishersweekly.com/blogs/PWxyz/2012/04/14/serving-a-public-that-knows-how-to-copy-orphan-works-and-mass-digitization/">
    <title>Serving a public that knows how to copy: orphan works and mass digitization « PWxyz</title>
    <dc:date>2012-04-14T16:27:41+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://blogs.publishersweekly.com/blogs/PWxyz/2012/04/14/serving-a-public-that-knows-how-to-copy-orphan-works-and-mass-digitization/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["For examples of materials with high merit and difficult rights status, Bruce Hartford of the American Civil Rights Movement website highlighted the sheer impossibility of determining rightsholders for many archival materials: internal documents created by Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) in the 1960s are orphans because SNCC no longer exists. A photograph taken by an unknown prisoner in a Southern jail of another prisoner is an orphan because the copyright is held by the unknown prisoner who took the original photograph. In a similar vein, Rick Prelinger aired a color video, possibly shot by an employee of the War Relocation Authority, of the 1944 release of Japanese-Americans interned at the Jerome War Relocation Center in Arkansas.

This is a crucial point that is rarely noted: orphan status may be most common for materials generated on the margins of society — by people whose names and presence were never recorded, sometimes because of persecution; or by informal or transient organizations, groups, and movements that never had an opportunity to create their own legacy. For this content — which includes some of the most important artifacts that a society is likely to produce, documenting both its struggles and those who speak without a recorded voice — formal interventions are unlikely to make a meaningful difference because there is so little ownership data to work with. In these cases, Fair Use is often the appropriate apparatus."]]></description>
<dc:subject>copyright intellectual-property orphaned-works digitization law</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:e392817bbdd9/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:copyright"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:intellectual-property"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:orphaned-works"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:digitization"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
</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.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopica87.pdf">
    <title>[PDF] explanation of applying for &quot;nonprofit status&quot;</title>
    <dc:date>2011-10-14T11:06:49+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopica87.pdf</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[aka "Group Exemption Letters"]]></description>
<dc:subject>Workantile nonprofit tax law</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:cf5743075f98/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Workantile"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:nonprofit"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:tax"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopica88.pdf">
    <title>[PDF] IRS discussion of labor vs. business leagues</title>
    <dc:date>2011-10-14T11:05:47+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopica88.pdf</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><dc:subject>Workantile tax law nonprofit</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:ad4db71152ac/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Workantile"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:tax"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:nonprofit"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopica96.pdf">
    <title>[PDF] discussion of computer associations, SIGs &amp;c</title>
    <dc:date>2011-10-14T11:03:04+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopica96.pdf</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><dc:subject>nonprofit SIG tax law</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:80cac4426820/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:nonprofit"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:SIG"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:tax"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicb80.pdf">
    <title>[PDF] rather good discussion of the definition of &quot;charity&quot; in US law</title>
    <dc:date>2011-10-14T11:00:10+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicb80.pdf</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><dc:subject>nonprofit charity law tax</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:a49623f61e3b/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:nonprofit"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:charity"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:tax"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicb99.pdf">
    <title>[PDF] Actually rather interesting discussion of intellectual property and nonprofits</title>
    <dc:date>2011-10-14T10:58:59+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicb99.pdf</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><dc:subject>intellectual-property nonprofit tax law</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:53feaae90991/</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:nonprofit"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:tax"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopico86.pdf">
    <title>[PDF] discussion of &quot;scientific research&quot; by 501(c)(3) nonprofits</title>
    <dc:date>2011-10-14T10:56:26+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopico86.pdf</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><dc:subject>Coscience nonprofit tax law</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:a6a98301d65c/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Coscience"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:nonprofit"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:tax"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicj03.pdf">
    <title>[PDF] 501(c)(5) labor organizations</title>
    <dc:date>2011-10-14T10:42:44+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicj03.pdf</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["Where most of an organization's members are entrepreneurs or independent contractors, the organization does not meet the requirements of IRC 501(c)(5). Rev. Rul. 78-288, 1978-2 C.B. 179."]]></description>
<dc:subject>Workantile nonprofit taxes law</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:c9eba4205fe3/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Workantile"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:nonprofit"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:taxes"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopice94.pdf">
    <title>[PDF] in-kind contributions to nonprofits</title>
    <dc:date>2011-10-14T10:36:02+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopice94.pdf</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[A discussion of "contributing" work and stuff to a charitable organization.]]></description>
<dc:subject>Workantile nonprofit tax law</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:a51e94e5f7ce/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Workantile"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:nonprofit"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:tax"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicg92.pdf">
    <title>[PDF} &quot;Economic development&quot; as a 501(c)(3) charity</title>
    <dc:date>2011-10-14T10:27:11+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicg92.pdf</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><dc:subject>Workantile nonprofit law</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:e2eadd43dcb6/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Workantile"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:nonprofit"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopici03.pdf">
    <title>[PDF] IRS 501(c)(4) organizations</title>
    <dc:date>2011-10-14T10:10:57+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopici03.pdf</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[social welfare groups]]></description>
<dc:subject>Workantile nonprofit law regulation</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:df8e614b9b9a/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Workantile"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:nonprofit"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:regulation"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopick03.pdf">
    <title>[PDF] discussion of IRS 501(c)(6) non-profit status</title>
    <dc:date>2011-10-14T09:05:21+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopick03.pdf</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Business Associations]]></description>
<dc:subject>Workantile nonprofit taxes law</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:c62d2a3868e9/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Workantile"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:nonprofit"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:taxes"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/07/its-back-wipo-broadcasting-treaty-returns-grave">
    <title>It's Back: WIPO Broadcasting Treaty Returns From The Grave | Electronic Frontier Foundation</title>
    <dc:date>2011-07-08T10:20:45+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/07/its-back-wipo-broadcasting-treaty-returns-grave</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["Granting broadcasters and cablecasters intellectual property rights that apply independently of copyright in the programs being broadcast, together with legally enforceable technological protection measures, raises concerns for access to public domain works. These measures would add complexity to copyright clearance regimes for creators of podcasts and documentary films, and interfere with consumers’ ability to make home recordings permitted under national copyright laws. Granting broadcasters and cablecasters exclusive rights to authorize retransmissions of broadcasts over the Internet will harm competition and innovation by allowing broadcasters and cablecasters to control the types of devices that can receive transmissions. It will also create new liability risks for Internet intermediaries that retransmit information on the Internet."]]></description>
<dc:subject>public-domain intellectual-property public-policy law corporatism</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:a8f4197a280d/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-domain"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:intellectual-property"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:corporatism"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.biofortified.org/2011/05/private-nonprofit-foundations-public-health-potential-conflicts-of-interest-in-corporate-links/?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ResearchBloggingAllEnglish+%28Research+Blogging+-+English+-+All+Topics%29">
    <title>Private nonprofit foundations &amp; Public Health: Potential conflicts of interest in corporate links « Biofortified</title>
    <dc:date>2011-05-22T12:23:23+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.biofortified.org/2011/05/private-nonprofit-foundations-public-health-potential-conflicts-of-interest-in-corporate-links/?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ResearchBloggingAllEnglish+%28Research+Blogging+-+English+-+All+Topics%29</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["They leave us with some strong statements and suggestions:

A private foundation clearly has the legal right to spend money however it wishes within the limits of the law; yet, in an environment where private foundations influence the future direction of, for example, what programs will be introduced into a foreign community, in a manner that does not necessarily involve directorship or voting from the community members themselves, it is reasonable to subject the decision-making processes of these entities to public debate, especially if these funds were to have otherwise been collected for public redistribution through federal taxation."]]></description>
<dc:subject>nonprofit conflict-of-interest network-theory social-networks governance law propriety</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:8cdf09500e17/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:nonprofit"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:conflict-of-interest"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:network-theory"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:social-networks"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:governance"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:propriety"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-heads-norwegian-domain-blocking-list-110520/?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed:+Torrentfreak+(Torrentfreak)&amp;utm_content=Google+Reader">
    <title>Pirate Bay Heads Norwegian Domain Blocking List | TorrentFreak</title>
    <dc:date>2011-05-20T11:33:20+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-heads-norwegian-domain-blocking-list-110520/?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed:+Torrentfreak+(Torrentfreak)&amp;utm_content=Google+Reader</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["The spread of anti-filesharing measures across the United States and Europe appears to be accelerating at a somewhat dizzying pace. On an almost daily basis during the last few months stories about controversial and sometimes draconian measures to deal with online infringement have hit the headlines.

Say what you like about the big movie and music studios – they certainly know how to coordinate their lobbying to perfection. Timing like this, with legislation being mulled in many major markets simultaneously, sends a powerful message."]]></description>
<dc:subject>reintermediation law globalism copyright-war that-whole-free-assembly-thing-depends-on-what-you're-up-to</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:94b0208ae65d/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:reintermediation"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:globalism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:copyright-war"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:that-whole-free-assembly-thing-depends-on-what-you're-up-to"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://weblogs.swarthmore.edu/burke/2010/09/30/crime-and-punishment/">
    <title>Crime and Punishment « Easily Distracted</title>
    <dc:date>2010-09-30T14:55:27+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://weblogs.swarthmore.edu/burke/2010/09/30/crime-and-punishment/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["What I’d like is that the two Rutgers students have to work in everything they do for a more humane culture, for a wiser use of communicative media. I’d like them to have a special charge to live and teach the Golden Rule to their children, their friends, their neighbors, their co-workers, their communities, to any stranger who will listen and maybe even those who’d rather not."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>crime-and-punishment privacy American-culture internet-culture law pragmatism-at-its-core</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:9e25e3a89558/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:crime-and-punishment"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:privacy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:American-culture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:internet-culture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:pragmatism-at-its-core"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://seekingalpha.com/article/208748-bp-the-mother-of-all-egregious-violators?source=feed">
    <title>BP: The Mother of All Egregious Violators -- Seeking Alpha</title>
    <dc:date>2010-06-07T23:33:36+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/208748-bp-the-mother-of-all-egregious-violators?source=feed</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["Are "willful and flagrant violation" of safety and "intentional disregard" of safety criminal acts? Can they be criminal only if someone is injured or dies? These are questions that need to be addressed."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>corporatism law responsibility public-policy BP oil-and-gas oilspill</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:f32f8b2cb10e/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:corporatism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:responsibility"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:BP"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:oil-and-gas"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:oilspill"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.google.com/googlebooks/uspto.html">
    <title>USPTO Bulk Downloads</title>
    <dc:date>2010-06-05T19:39:14+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.google.com/googlebooks/uspto.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["Google and the USPTO have entered into an agreement to make the following USPTO products available to the public at no charge:

Patents (grants, applications, assignments, classification information, and maintenance fee events)
Trademarks (grants, applications, assignments, and TTAB proceedings)

All data originated from the USPTO. Google is hosting this data unchanged, except for repackaging into zip files."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>patents intellectual-property open-access raw-data-now government2.0 social-networks law datasets nudge-targets natural-language-processing manfred-macx-approves</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:84697f9c8e61/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:patents"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:intellectual-property"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:open-access"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:raw-data-now"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:government2.0"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:social-networks"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:datasets"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:nudge-targets"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:natural-language-processing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:manfred-macx-approves"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2010/04/caveat-emptor-is-not-a-business-plan.html?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+EconomistsView+(Economist's+View+(EconomistsView))">
    <title>Economist's View: &quot;Caveat Emptor Is Not a Business Plan&quot;</title>
    <dc:date>2010-04-29T12:11:24+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2010/04/caveat-emptor-is-not-a-business-plan.html?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+EconomistsView+(Economist's+View+(EconomistsView))</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["What is striking is that caveat emptor arises as a legal principle mainly because of the tangle the courts would get into if they tried to enforce a more ambitious standard of right and wrong.
Chief Justice Marshall’s logic surely applies with even greater force to modern deals between investment banks and sophisticated qualified investors, both of which will be simultaneously working on many deals, each involving sensitive proprietary information."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>public-policy financial-crisis caveat-emptor law regulation business-model bankers-should-start-avoiding-lampposts-right-about-now</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:1853fb4b8df2/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:financial-crisis"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:caveat-emptor"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:regulation"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:business-model"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:bankers-should-start-avoiding-lampposts-right-about-now"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2010/04/the-two-issues-to-watch-on-financial-reform.html?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+EconomistsView+(Economist's+View+(EconomistsView))">
    <title>Economist's View: &quot;The Two Issues to Watch on Financial Reform&quot;</title>
    <dc:date>2010-04-27T11:56:45+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2010/04/the-two-issues-to-watch-on-financial-reform.html?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+EconomistsView+(Economist's+View+(EconomistsView))</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["We will be safe so long as the present crisis is fresh in our minds and caution is the order of the day in the financial marketplace, but it won't be too long until we forget and that's when the danger begins.…"
]]></description>
<dc:subject>financial-crisis economics public-policy law</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:7bb2846fd980/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:financial-crisis"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:economics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20031214210634851">
    <title>Groklaw - The GPL is a License, Not a Contract, Which is Why the Sky Isn't Falling</title>
    <dc:date>2010-04-12T14:38:45+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20031214210634851</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["Of course, you could avoid all such troubles in the first place by not stealing GPL code to begin with. But if something happens inadvertently and some rogue employee sneaks some GPL code into your proprietary product, the sky isn't falling. It's a manageable risk and a solvable problem. No one wants to steal your code in retaliation or force it to be something you don't want it to be. The GPL is unequivocally a license, and that's the truth."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>open-source licensing license-agreement law FUD explanation</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:d4a5f6bff5c2/</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:license-agreement"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:FUD"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:explanation"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/sexandgender/2410/why_won%E2%80%99t_conservatives_call_gay-bashing_a_hate_crime/?page=2">
    <title>Why Won’t Conservatives Call Gay-Bashing a Hate Crime? | Sexuality &amp; Gender | ReligionDispatches</title>
    <dc:date>2010-04-07T12:44:57+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/sexandgender/2410/why_won%E2%80%99t_conservatives_call_gay-bashing_a_hate_crime/?page=2</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["And that, I think, is why some Oklahoma legislators have voted to insulate homophobic violence from the “hate crime” label. At least on a subconscious level, I suspect they see a connection between homophobic violence and the beliefs to which they cleave. To call gay-bashing a hate crime would mean they couldn’t merely condemn the gay bashers. They’d also have to condemn themselves, their churches, and the broader cultural forces with which they identify.
My challenge to conservative legislators is this: If you really think your belief system is innocent, then you have no need to protect it in this way. And if you suspect that your belief system is not innocent, then it shouldn’t be protected. Either way, you ought to call a hate crime what it is."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>homophobia equal-rights civil-rights social-norms cultural-assumptions conservatism law regionalism</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:9a53dc352acc/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:homophobia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:equal-rights"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:civil-rights"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:social-norms"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:cultural-assumptions"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:conservatism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:regionalism"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/copyrightforlibrarians/Main_Page">
    <title>Main Page - Copyright for Librarians</title>
    <dc:date>2010-03-30T12:38:39+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/copyrightforlibrarians/Main_Page</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["Copyright for Librarians is a joint project of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society and Electronic Information for Libraries (eIFL), a consortium of libraries from 50 countries in Africa, Asia and Europe. The goal of the project is to provide librarians in developing and transitional countries information concerning copyright law. More specifically, it aspires to inform librarians concerning:
copyright law in general
the aspects of copyright law that most affect libraries
how librarians in the future could most effectively participate in the processes by which copyright law is interpreted and shaped."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>copyright libraries intellectual-property courseware law librarians resources training</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:997e92b5e5b3/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:copyright"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:libraries"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:intellectual-property"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:courseware"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:librarians"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:resources"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:training"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2010/03/dr-michelson-supports-patent-reform.html?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PatentlyO+(Patently-O%3A+Patent+Law+Blog)">
    <title>Dr. Michelson Supports Patent Reform - Patent Law Blog (Patently-O)</title>
    <dc:date>2010-03-20T22:48:27+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2010/03/dr-michelson-supports-patent-reform.html?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PatentlyO+(Patently-O%3A+Patent+Law+Blog)</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["I strongly implore you on behalf of myself, independent inventors like me, and for the good of our country to support the patent reform legislation before you. And if upon reflection you recognize how truly vital the Patent Office is to the future of our country then I would ask you to do more and to consider the issue of “revenue diversion”.

The U.S.P.T.O. is unique in American government in that it costs the taxpayer nothing while providing the best dollar for dollar value in the intellectual property industry. The U.S.P.T.O. should have the authority to set its fees so that they are appropriate to the services provided and “in the aggregate” sufficient to fully optimize the functioning of that office, and to reasonably budget for the capital expenditures that will be required in the future for it to continue to do so."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>patents patent-reform public-policy government law reform Congrefs-fucks</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:445dbd5a72dd/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:patents"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:patent-reform"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:government"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:reform"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Congrefs-fucks"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2010/03/aiding-and-abetting-the-enemy/">
    <title>Aiding and Abetting the Enemy | The League of Ordinary Gentlemen</title>
    <dc:date>2010-03-20T22:46:27+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2010/03/aiding-and-abetting-the-enemy/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["I agree that Kerr’s point about utilizing the judiciary system to determine who, precisely, constitutes an enemy combatant and who does not is a vital point. But an equally vital point, at least to my mind, is summed by another portion of Kerr’s retaliation wherein he revisits the John Adams analogy that has been floating about (emphasis mine),

When Adams agreed to represent the English soldiers, he was not fulfilling some sort of obligation: No one had to represent the Englishmen. Adams acted — and was criticized then, but celebrated now, for it — because he agreed to represent the soldiers out of a personal conviction that no person should face a trial without counsel."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>Bushism law rights civil-rights terrorism war-mentality foundationalism-and-fundamentalism-sittin-in-a-tree</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:42bcbfcf9037/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Bushism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:rights"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:civil-rights"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:terrorism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:war-mentality"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:foundationalism-and-fundamentalism-sittin-in-a-tree"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/cfpa-ii-some-additional-thoughts/">
    <title>CFPA II, Some Additional Thoughts « Rortybomb</title>
    <dc:date>2010-03-07T13:50:57+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/cfpa-ii-some-additional-thoughts/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["Now right now, consumers are facing a range of financial products, from student loans to credit cards to mutual funds, that are much more complicated than they faced in 1933. Some of this complication is innovation, some is meant to synthetically create opacity in the product innovating product differentiation, and some is just regulatory arbitrage. As Dan Geldon has written, the regime of disclosure has been turned into a weapon against consumers instead of the mechanism to let information and competition do its job. So it’s time to update that regime to handle the 21st century."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>transparency lobbyists public-policy government-as-theater law regulation deregulation financial-crisis</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:076b16fc97f5/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:transparency"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:lobbyists"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:government-as-theater"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:regulation"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:deregulation"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:financial-crisis"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://piratasum.com/the-canadian-privacy-commissioner-vs-the-face">
    <title>Why Facebook Can't Escape From the Privacy Problem - Pirata Sum</title>
    <dc:date>2010-01-26T00:04:06+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://piratasum.com/the-canadian-privacy-commissioner-vs-the-face</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["While most people don't realize this, they've given Facebook a license to use any content they upload onto Facebook for whatever purpose they choose and the power to transfer that that right as long as the content remains within your profile. They try to make clear what sorts of uses they currently put this license to in order to make their users at ease with posting their content on the service."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>law privacy Facebook why-I-don't-use-Facebook</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:f99172defb3f/</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:privacy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Facebook"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:why-I-don't-use-Facebook"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/12/ny-times-recession-cases-flooding.html?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CalculatedRisk+(Calculated+Risk)">
    <title>Calculated Risk: NY Times: Recession Cases Flooding Courts</title>
    <dc:date>2009-12-28T14:02:10+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/12/ny-times-recession-cases-flooding.html?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CalculatedRisk+(Calculated+Risk)</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["[T]he broad impact of the recession is clear in hundreds of thousands of new cases across the judicial system, including people challenging their real estate taxes, home foreclosures, contract disputes and family offenses."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>financial-crisis law trends-worth-noting business-culture</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:1a2754e24dbd/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:financial-crisis"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:trends-worth-noting"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:business-culture"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://grammatically.blogspot.com/2009/12/list-of-links-for-lawyers-among-us.html">
    <title>The Society for the Promotion of Good Grammar: A List of Links for the Lawyers Among Us</title>
    <dc:date>2009-12-27T20:41:12+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://grammatically.blogspot.com/2009/12/list-of-links-for-lawyers-among-us.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["We've been meaning to post this list of links to the language essays of Robert Cumbow for ages. He's a lawyer in our home town of Seattle. Enjoy!"
]]></description>
<dc:subject>grammar essays essayist language law writing collection</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:f71fb74aa5c9/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:grammar"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:essays"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:essayist"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:language"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:writing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:collection"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/144740/al_franken's_anti-rape_amendment_passes,_infuriating_several_(male)_republicans/">
    <title>Al Franken's Anti-Rape Amendment Passes, Infuriating Several (Male) Republicans | PEEK | AlterNet</title>
    <dc:date>2009-12-27T20:11:30+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/144740/al_franken's_anti-rape_amendment_passes,_infuriating_several_(male)_republicans/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["Franken's amendment is driving the Republicans crazy because they basically voted to protect rapists and are now paying a political price for that. And now they are whining that Franken was somehow "uncollegial" because the amendment put them in an embarrassing position (which makes me wonder how many other things issues are swept under the rug because it would make members of the opposition uncomfortable.)"
]]></description>
<dc:subject>politics Republicans conservatives law militarism corporatism</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:0a19a484a8d2/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:politics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Republicans"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:conservatives"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:militarism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:corporatism"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/12/i_cant_see_it_olympia.html">
    <title>Ezra Klein - First, stop doing harm</title>
    <dc:date>2009-12-15T13:25:19+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/12/i_cant_see_it_olympia.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["But health care is not zero-sum villainy. This post is not arguing that insurers are better than you think and providers worse. This post is arguing that nature of both groups is beside the point. They work within the market the government constructs. And both the market for insurance and the market for health care need reform. But we're comfortable reforming only the market for insurance, and so we are leaving half -- or maybe more than half -- the job undone."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>financial-crisis insurance medical-culture medicine healthcare reform government law public-policy lobbyists</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:f90b1814c889/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:financial-crisis"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:insurance"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:medical-culture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:medicine"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:healthcare"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:reform"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:government"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:lobbyists"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://computationallegalstudies.com/2009/11/05/hustle-and-flow-a-social-network-analysis-of-the-american-federal-judiciary-repost-from-325/">
    <title>Hustle and Flow: A Social Network Analysis of the American Federal Judiciary [Repost from 3/25] | Computational Legal Studies</title>
    <dc:date>2009-11-08T20:27:24+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://computationallegalstudies.com/2009/11/05/hustle-and-flow-a-social-network-analysis-of-the-american-federal-judiciary-repost-from-325/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["Scholars have long asserted that social structure is an important feature of a variety of societal institutions. As part of a larger effort to develop a fully integrated model of judicial decision making, we argue that social structure-operationalized as the professional and social connections between judicial actors-partially directs outcomes in the hierarchical federal judiciary. Since different social structures impose dissimilar consequences upon outputs, the precursor to evaluating the doctrinal consequences that a given social structure imposes is a descriptive effort to characterize its properties. Given the difficulty associated with obtaining appropriate data for federal judges, it is necessary to rely upon a proxy measure to paint a picture of the social landscape. In the aggregate, we believe the flow of law clerks reflects a reasonable proxy for social and professional linkages between jurists...."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>law court social-networks graph-theory influence culture it's-people the-law-as-community</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:92cb7883c889/</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:court"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:social-networks"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:graph-theory"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:influence"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:culture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:it's-people"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:the-law-as-community"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://futurismic.com/2009/11/06/the-anonymous-hunters-corporate-critics-and-whistleblowers-beware/">
    <title>The Anonymous Hunters: corporate critics and whistleblowers beware | Blog | Futurismic</title>
    <dc:date>2009-11-06T19:47:09+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://futurismic.com/2009/11/06/the-anonymous-hunters-corporate-critics-and-whistleblowers-beware/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["That said, the internet is pretty vast, and some of its denizens are smarter than others… and I suspect Wragge and Co’s fees for hunting down anonymous commenters will reflect those realities. It also remains to be seen how much they can achieve when working on sites hosted in countries where the jurisdiction isn’t so clear-cut, or sites like Wikileaks which are geared toward protecting their sources. What we can be sure of is that when lawyers can see a paycheck, there’s dirty laundry waiting to be washed… and we can expect the corporate (and political) world to wise up to the web pretty fast now that the full extent of its power is becoming apparent."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>transparency corporatism law anonymity protected-speech criticism lawsuits</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:6e7f64c2ee1c/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:transparency"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:corporatism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:anonymity"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:protected-speech"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:criticism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:lawsuits"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/11-02-09.htm#publicgood">
    <title>Peter Suber, SPARC Open Access Newsletter, 11/2/09</title>
    <dc:date>2009-11-06T12:09:35+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/11-02-09.htm#publicgood</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["It makes a huge difference who can say "take it or leave it" in a negotiation.  Right now publishers tend to hold that privileged position.  But as prices and cancellations keep rising, the positions are reversing.  Even apart from the average balance of bargaining power, slowly shifting to universities, there is the bargaining power over specific titles.  The desirability of journals is a matter of degree, despite the binary sound of "must-have".  Some high-demand journals may be unthreatened by all recent developments.  But the set of unthreatened journals is shrinking, and set for which universities could modify basic terms to better serve research and researchers is growing.  For a growing number of journals overall, universities could cancel, threaten to cancel, or bargain effectively, if they wanted to. "
]]></description>
<dc:subject>publishing academic-culture open-access universities negotiation law public-policy via:hrheingold copyright commons public-good economics disintermediation-in-action</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:4e9a1db237b8/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:publishing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:academic-culture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:open-access"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:universities"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:negotiation"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:via:hrheingold"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:copyright"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:commons"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-good"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:economics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:disintermediation-in-action"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/movabletype/archives/2009/06/future_trends_f_1.html">
    <title>Future Trends for Same-Sex Marriage Support? - Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science</title>
    <dc:date>2009-11-05T19:22:36+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/movabletype/archives/2009/06/future_trends_f_1.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["We plot explicit support for allowing same-sex marriage broken down by state and by age. Seven states cross the 50% mark overall as of our current estimates, but the generation gap is huge. If policy were set by state-by-state majorities of those 65 or older, none would allow same-sex marriage. If policy were set by those under 30, only 12 states would not allow-same-sex marriage."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>rights politics demographics law prejudice cultural-norms statistics</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:86c4b33a317b/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:rights"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:politics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:demographics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:prejudice"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:cultural-norms"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:statistics"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.boingboing.net/2009/10/30/oregon-once-again-cl.html">
    <title>Oregon once again claims that law is copyrighted - Boing Boing</title>
    <dc:date>2009-11-05T15:23:23+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.boingboing.net/2009/10/30/oregon-once-again-cl.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["Well, those copyright assertions are back, this time by the Attorney General, who asserted ownership over the (for real!) Attorney General's Public Record and Public Meeting Manual. I spent last week in Oregon meeting with law school faculty and giving lectures at 3 universities on the topic of who owns the law."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>copyright intellectual-property activism law culture-war public-policy public-domain openness</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:d23a9ac96022/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:copyright"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:intellectual-property"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:activism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:culture-war"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-domain"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:openness"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.trademarkia.com/">
    <title>Free Trademark Search | Protect Business Name | Interesting Name Ideas | Trademarkia</title>
    <dc:date>2009-09-21T11:38:06+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.trademarkia.com/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><dc:subject>search-engines trademark intellectual-property images branding business law tools</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:9b0a7bfb8323/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:search-engines"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:trademark"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:intellectual-property"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:images"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:branding"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:business"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:tools"/>
</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://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2009/09/do-corporations-have-a-right-to-free-speech.html">
    <title>Economist's View: Do Corporations Have a Right to Free Speech?</title>
    <dc:date>2009-09-06T13:21:15+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2009/09/do-corporations-have-a-right-to-free-speech.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["The Supreme Court is going to decide if corporations have First Amendment rights that allow "direct, unlimited corporate participation in campaigns." Let's hope the decision is that they don't:"
]]></description>
<dc:subject>politics free-speech constitution corporatism propaganda law</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:c12c1a17621f/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:politics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:free-speech"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:constitution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:corporatism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:propaganda"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=577244">
    <title>SSRN-Trade Secrets and the Option Value of Involuntary Exchange by J. Gregory Sidak</title>
    <dc:date>2009-08-27T22:02:21+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=577244</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["A trade secret is proprietary but unpatented information that confers a competitive advantage on its owner. If someone impermissibly uses a trade secret, the owner of the secret is entitled to a remedy that may include, in addition to damages, an injunction that forbids the unauthorized user from manufacturing a product that employs the owner’s secret. Courts disagree, however, over whether such an injunction should continue after the trade secret becomes public knowledge—for example, through a patent application or marketing. Even when courts agree that the injunction should continue after the trade secret becomes public, they still disagree over whether the injunction should be perpetual or limited in duration. This article uses real option theory within a Schumpeterian framework of innovation and competition to clarify the conflict regarding the proper duration of an injunction to remedy the unauthorized use of trade secrets.…"
]]></description>
<dc:subject>real-options pricing nondisclosure trade-secrets valuation law economics</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:0751d72ef8b3/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:real-options"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:pricing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:nondisclosure"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:trade-secrets"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:valuation"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:economics"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.theengineer.co.uk/Articles/312772/Autonomous+machines+prompt+debate.htm?nl=TE_NL&amp;dep=webops&amp;dte=210809">
    <title>Autonomous machines prompt debate - News - The Engineer</title>
    <dc:date>2009-08-22T12:05:46+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.theengineer.co.uk/Articles/312772/Autonomous+machines+prompt+debate.htm?nl=TE_NL&amp;dep=webops&amp;dte=210809</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["‘The law is built around cause and effect, but it’s bad at assessing systems, where each individual part is harmless but the whole might be harmful,’ he said. ‘It’s still in the age of automation, where the role of a human operator is well-defined.’"
]]></description>
<dc:subject>via:mcphee automation escape-from-design liability law emergence responsibility autonomous machines</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:69c3d75b5c16/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:via:mcphee"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:automation"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:escape-from-design"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:liability"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:emergence"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:responsibility"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:autonomous"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:machines"/>
</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.thevalve.org/go/valve/article/colorado_judge_mugs_churchill/">
    <title>The Valve - A Literary Organ | Colorado Judge Mugs Churchill</title>
    <dc:date>2009-07-09T10:56:06+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.thevalve.org/go/valve/article/colorado_judge_mugs_churchill/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["Look for this stinker to be reversed on appeal. And if it isn’t--whoa, nelly. Strap on for a wild ride.  Increasingly the Law says administrations have academic freedom--and you don’t.

Here’s your homework assignment for the day. Ask yourself what “academic freedom for administrators” means."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>academic-culture law academia academic-freedom universities disintermediation-targets have-the-cook-set-aside-some-Schadenfreude-now-please</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:1c84d6ff7208/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:academic-culture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:academia"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:academic-freedom"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:universities"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:disintermediation-targets"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:have-the-cook-set-aside-some-Schadenfreude-now-please"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.onthecommons.org/content.php?id=2462">
    <title>OnTheCommons.org » Varieties of Enclosure &amp; Commons Alternatives</title>
    <dc:date>2009-06-25T10:47:03+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.onthecommons.org/content.php?id=2462</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["An important addition to the growing international dialogue about the commons can be found in the new anthology, Genes, Bytes and Emissions: To Whom Does the World Belong? (discussed in this previous blog post). Recently released in German, the essays in this book are now available online in English.

The book was edited by Silke Helfrich and published by the Heinrich Boell Foundation; Helfrich is the former director of the Foundation’s Mexico City office, which hosted a major conference, Citizenship and Commons, in December 2006. The collection, whose title in English is To Whom Does the World Belong? offers a thoughtful and provocative array of viewpoints on the commons. (The links below connect to pdf files of the essays.)"
]]></description>
<dc:subject>commons economics public-policy law sustainability books essays philosophy social-norms Workantile</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:cc085923c98e/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:commons"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:economics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:sustainability"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:books"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:essays"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:philosophy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:social-norms"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:Workantile"/>
</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://diveintomark.org/archives/2009/03/21/accessibility-is-a-harsh-mistress">
    <title>Accessibility is a harsh mistress [dive into mark]</title>
    <dc:date>2009-06-15T12:55:01+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://diveintomark.org/archives/2009/03/21/accessibility-is-a-harsh-mistress</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["Back to Sam’s question. Few authors publish in true xhtml mode, fewer still include inline svg images in their xhtml, and fewer still include titles or descriptions in those images. But in theory, you can imagine a situation where a web author publishes in true xhtml mode, and the author includes an inline svg image within an xhtml page, and an end user is using a browser that supports true xhtml, and that user is using a hypothetical screenreader-of-the-future that implements support for the <title> and <desc> elements within inline svg images within xhtml pages, and that user stumbles across that page. It’s theoretically possible, therefore you have to do it. Period. End of discussion."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>accessibility standards use-cases design law html usability access</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:62f38d25f4da/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:accessibility"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:standards"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:use-cases"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:design"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:usability"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:access"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.automatinginvention.com/archives/2009/05/easing_the_pate.html">
    <title>Automating Invention: Artificial creativity, software, computers, patents, inventing, invention, genetic algorithms, genetic programming, intellectual property, law, intellectual property law, evolutionary computation, evolvable hardware, neural networ...</title>
    <dc:date>2009-05-21T13:44:19+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.automatinginvention.com/archives/2009/05/easing_the_pate.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["EPO's president, Alison Brimelow, has been quoted as saying: "Huge backlogs change the nature of the patenting system and create ambiguities which can be exploited in ways unforeseen by those who established the patent system."

In response, the European Union has funded a project called PATExpert which uses semantic web technology. PATExpert is a multimedia content representation system for the retrieval, classification and generation of concise parent information. The system supports multiple languages and provides tools to assess patent material. The system has been demonstrated and the probable next step is commercialization for general use."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>patents intellectual-property law public-policy semantic-web technology design-automation</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:2c787b1bed5c/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:patents"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:intellectual-property"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:semantic-web"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:technology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:design-automation"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://consumerist.com/5256508/food-companies-our-food-probably-isnt-safe-enough-for-your-microwave-good-luck">
    <title>Food Companies: Our Food Probably Isn't Safe Enough For Your Microwave. Good Luck!</title>
    <dc:date>2009-05-19T18:30:55+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://consumerist.com/5256508/food-companies-our-food-probably-isnt-safe-enough-for-your-microwave-good-luck</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["In fact, one food giant, General Mills, has essentially conceded that cooking their food in a microwave isn't good enough."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>food agriculture marketing law disclaimers reliability unreliability quality-control</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:89e2efa29c28/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:food"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:agriculture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:marketing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:disclaimers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:reliability"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:unreliability"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:quality-control"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.publicdomainsherpa.com/index.html">
    <title>Public Domain Sherpa - your guide to finding copyright-free works</title>
    <dc:date>2009-04-14T18:32:15+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.publicdomainsherpa.com/index.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["The US public domain is filled with creative works you can use any way you want to. No need to ask anyone’s permission. No fees necessary.

You can find photos, books, music, software — and more — that you’re free to recast, remix, and build upon. But how do you find these works? And how can you be sure they really are copyright-free?

Copyright law is complex (as complex as the tax code, some say) and there’s a lot of misinformation and hype out there about what is and what isn’t “public domain.” It can get confusing."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>public-domain publishing intellectual-property copyright reference law public-policy rights</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:0da8af82410c/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-domain"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:publishing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:intellectual-property"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:copyright"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:reference"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-policy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:rights"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Public_domain">
    <title>Wikipedia:Public domain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</title>
    <dc:date>2009-04-14T18:17:55+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Public_domain</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Actually quite a bit of interesting meta-info here
]]></description>
<dc:subject>public-domain intellectual-property law international publishing rights copyright reference policy</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:bd026d81dcbb/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:public-domain"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:intellectual-property"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:international"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:publishing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:rights"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:copyright"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:reference"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:policy"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://computationallegalstudies.com/">
    <title>Computational Legal Studies</title>
    <dc:date>2009-04-07T12:08:55+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://computationallegalstudies.com/</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Excellent visualizations of legal and government datasets, with analytical discussion
]]></description>
<dc:subject>via:paulbhartzog visualization law government transparency raw-data-now</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:f1f673aba4e0/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:via:paulbhartzog"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:visualization"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:government"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:transparency"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:raw-data-now"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://tapr.org/ohl.html">
    <title>The TAPR Open Hardware License</title>
    <dc:date>2009-04-05T15:05:51+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://tapr.org/ohl.html</link>
    <dc:creator>Vaguery</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["The TAPR Open Hardware License ("OHL") provides a framework for hardware projects that is similar to the one used for Open Source software. This isn't as straight-forward as it seems because legal concepts that work well for software (such as copyright and copyleft) don't neatly fit when dealing with hardware products and the documentation used to create them."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>business legal law open-source hardware opensource license</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/b:a72b0b84d157/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:business"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:legal"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:law"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:open-source"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:hardware"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:opensource"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:Vaguery/t:license"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>