I had missed that post by Derek on the first sale doctrine and video stores. The context is Bowers v. Baystate. Cory’s comment on that post was noted by Donna and it calls for regulation of contracts related to intellectual property.

Can you even call those contracts licenses now that they apply to objects that are subject to intellectual property but concern rights and obligations outside the scope of IP?

Derek’s post also points to Findlaw’s model contracts directory, which is a nice resource I did not know about.

Remember Aimster? Oral arguments on appeal were last week.

Aaron Schwartz posts about his experience in the courtroom.

Another report, by an attorney this time. [via Lessig].

Derek posted his thoughs on the case, including his opinion on the contributory vs vicarious infringement debate.

Of course, Donna has tons of links too.

Some people seem to focus more on Aimee herself than on the underlying legal argument. But hey, she’s a good poster child.

And why is this case important? In two very short words, it could change the principle under which the manufacturer of goods cannot be held liable for its misuses. Like a VCR, which you could use to copy movies (but does anyone actually bother?) or tape TV shows for later viewing.

Ed Felten Explains How Black Boxes Interfere With Effective Public Policy: the video. From the Berkeley DRM conference

[via Boing Boing]