Center for the Study of the Public Domain

Conference on the Public Domain

Duke Law School – November 9—11, 2001
(With the support of the Center for the Public Domain)

A special edition collection of the papers from the conference is now available for purchase on amazon.com. Free digital versions of these papers are also available here.

About the Conference

The last fifteen years has seen a rise in both the importance and the strength of intellectual property rights in the world economy; rights have expanded in areas ranging from the human genome to the Internet and have been strengthened with legally backed digital fences, lengthened copyright terms and increased penalties. Is this expansion of intellectual property necessary to respond to new copying technologies, and desirable because it will produce investment and innovation? Must we privatize the public domain to avoid a “tragedy of the commons,” or can the technologies of cheap copying and global networks actually make common pool management more efficient than legal monopolies? Questions such as these have thrown attention on the “other side” of intellectual property: the public domain. What does the public domain do? What is its importance, its history, its role in science, art, and in the building of the Internet? How is the public domain similar to and different from the idea of a commons? This conference, the first major meeting to focus squarely on the topic of the public domain, will try to answer some of these questions in areas ranging from the human genome to appropriationist art, from the production of scientific data to the architecture of our communications networks. For each panel, “focus papers” will be produced by authorities in the field and made available on the Internet before the event in order to generate discussion.

Background Information

Yochai Benkler
FREE AS THE AIR TO COMMON USE: FIRST AMENDMENT CONSTRAINTS ON ENCLOSURE OF THE PUBLIC DOMAIN

James Boyle
POLITICS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: ENVIRONMENTALISM FOR THE NET?

Julie E. Cohen
LOCHNER IN CYBERSPACE: THE NEW ECONOMIC ORTHODOXY OF “RIGHTS
MANAGEMENT“

David Lange
RECOGNIZING THE PUBLIC DOMAIN

Jessica Litman
THE PUBLIC DOMAIN

Jerome Reichman
OF GREEN TULIPS AND LEGAL KUDZU: REPACKAGING RIGHTS IN SUBPATENTABLE INNOVATION

Papers

We are happy to announce the publication of the papers from this conference. Free digital versions of the published papers from the conference are now available here.

Framing Papers

The framing papers for the conference are intended to start the discussion before the conference even begins. At our request, the authors have made them available as discussion drafts, lacking the polish, the reservations, the citations, the second and third thoughts that more time would have provided. In return, we ask that you be charitable in noticing typos and slips of the pen, or brain. Thanks to all the contributors for producing such excellent papers on such short notice. They are arranged in sections corresponding to the organization of the conference:

Click here for the complete collection of papers from the conference

The History And Theory of The public domain

James Boyle,
The Second Enclosure Movement and the Construction of the Public Domain
We are in the middle of a second enclosure movement; it sounds grandiloquent to call it “the enclosure of the intangible commons of the mind” but in a very real sense, that is just what it is…. [This essay argues] that it is not enough merely to offer criticisms of the logic of enclosure. What’s needed is deeper; a change in the way that these issues are understood, a change that transforms even our perceptions of self-interest, making possible coalitions where none existed before. In.. this essay, I try to develop the vocabulary and the analytic tools for such a change. I offer an historical sketch of various types of skepticism about intellectual property, from the anti-monopolist criticisms of the Framers of the American Constitution, through the emergence of affirmative arguments for the public domain, to the use of the language of the commons to defend the possibility of distributed methods of non-proprietary production. In many ways, it turns out, concepts of the public domain show the same variation in assumptions, the same analytic differences, as the concept of property itself. I conclude by arguing that, for a number of reasons, the appropriate model for the change in thinking that I am arguing for comes from the history of the environmental movement; the invention of “the environment” as a concept pulls together a string of otherwise disconnected issues, offers analytical insight into the blindnesses implicit in prior ways of thinking, causes perception of common interest where none was seen before. Like the environment, the public domain must be “invented” before it is saved. Like the environment, like “nature,” the public domain turns out to be a concept that is considerably more slippery than many of us realize. And like the environment, it turns out to be useful, perhaps even necessary, nevertheless…
(Full Text)

Charlotte Hess and Elinor Ostrom
Artifacts, Facilities, and Content: Information as a Common-pool Resource
[C]ompetition for ownership of previously shared resources is not unique to the public domain of knowledge. . . . The goal of this paper is to summarize the lessons learned from a large body of international, interdisciplinary research on common-pool resources (CPRs) in the past 25 years and consider its usefulness in the analysis of the information as a resource. We will suggest ways in which the study of the governance and management of common-pool resources can be applied to the analysis of information and “the intellectual public domain.” . . . As one of the framing papers for this conference, we will focus on the language, the methodology, and outcomes of research on common-pool resources in order to better understand how property regimes affect the provision, production, distribution, appropriation, and consumption of scholarly information. Our brief analysis will suggest that collective action and new institutional design play as large a part in the shaping of scholarly information as do legal restrictions and market forces.
(Full Text)


“State Of the Public Domain” Report: Digital Networks, Cultural Production and Basic Science

Pamela Samuelson,
Digital Information, Digital Networks, and the Public Domain
[S]ome of what is in the public domain is detritus; some of what is valuable in the public domain might be better utilized if propertized to some degree; other parts of the public domain need to remain open and unownable as sources for future creations. In the course of explaining why I embrace this seemingly contradictory perspective, I will offer a map of the public domain. This map is a useful prelude to a discussion of possible impacts of various legal and policy developments affecting the digital public domain. Some initiatives, I will argue, would have adverse effects on the digital public domain, while others may not. This paper will identify a number of threats to the public domain that deserve attention. It will also celebrate contributions that digitalization and digital networks have made in extending the public domain and enabling projects to preserve the digital commons.
(Full Text)

Jerome H. Reichman and Paul F. Uhlir,
Promoting Public Good Uses of Scientific Data: A Contractually Reconstructed Commons for Science and Innovation
(Full Text)

Negativland,
Two relationships to a cultural public domain
A question to consider is this: should those who might be borrowed from have an absolute right to prevent all such free reuses of their properties, even when the reuse is obviously part of a new and unique work? Do we want to actually put all forms of unauthorized reuse under the heading of “theft,” implicating a socially valuable art form such as collage with criminal intent – a form which may be making controversial social or cultural points and cannot operate true to its vision when, regardless of whether or not it can afford the price of authorization, prior permission is required? We’d like to see copyright law acknowledge the logical and inalienable right of artists, not publishers or manufacturers, to determine what new art will consist of.
(Full Text)


Subject Area Study 1: Creativity, Appropriation, Culture and the Public Domain

David Lange and Jennifer Lange Anderson,
Copyright, Fair use and Transformative Critical Appropriation
In this essay we propose an extended interpretation of copyright’s fair use doctrine. Building on expanded readings of earlier scholarly work and case law, we suggest that fair use must be understood to make deliberate room for transformative appropriation of copyrighted work whenever the appropriation and transformation are necessary steps toward the realization of significant social criticism. . . . Our proposal would substantially limit the present ability of a copyright proprietor to employ infringement theories so as to impede social commentary arising from transformative appropriations of copyrighted work. It would do so by recognizing an affirmative presumption of fair use in the settings we describe, in terms more readily accessible to the creators of appropriative social criticism than is now the case. We believe that these changes would represent a significant improvement in the fair use doctrine itself.
(Full Text)


Subject Area Study 2: Commodification of the Public Domain: The Challenge for Science & Innovation

Arti K. Rai and Rebecca S. Eisenberg,
The Public and The Private in Biopharmaceutical Research
[B]iomedical research comes from a . . . tradition of open science, in which longstanding norms call for providing free access to new knowledge in the public domain. This tradition has eroded considerably over the past quarter century as patent claims have reached further upstream from end products to cover fundamental discoveries that provide the knowledge base for future product development. . . . [A significant factor] promoting intellectual property claims in the early stages of biomedical research has been the explicit policy of the U.S. government to promote patenting of government-sponsored research results by universities, government agencies, and other recipients of federal research funds. . . . We believe that the time is ripe to alter the Bayh-Dole Act to give funding agencies more latitude in guiding patenting and licensing activities of their grantees. More generally, we would welcome recognition by Congress that patenting is not always or even usually the best way to maximize the social value of inventions and discoveries made with federal funds.
(Full Text)


Subject Area Study 3: From Anarchist Software to Peer2peer Culture: The Public Domain in Bandwidth, Software and Content

Lawrence Lessig,
The Architecture of Innovation
Our future is this: the free speech clause of the first amendment will be read to entitle those who own the wires to change the logical layer and make it owned as well… and the free culture that we have seen flourish in this commons built by the Internet will be captured and controlled again by those who control most of the content and by those who succeed in Congress in expanding their control from the imperfect to the perfect. The future of control will get built by an idea; the idea that property is good so more property is better. It will get sanctioned by a culture that has forgotten any distinction, and that is so blinded by what is has forgotten that it does not even notice when the most extraordinary innovation that our culture has seen since Thoreau was a name most Americans could spell is built… on an architecture that mixes freedom and control; that built property within a commons; that got its life from this mix of property and the commons.
(Full Text)

Yochai Benkler,
Coase’s Penguin, or Linux and the Nature of the Firm
The emergence of GNU/Linux as a viable alternative to the Windows
operating system and of the Apache webserver software as the leading web server have focused wide attention on the phenomenon of free or open source software. Most of the attention to the economic aspects of the phenomenon has been focused on the question of incentives — why, it is asked, would anyone invest effort in a productive enterprise in whose fruits they do not claim proprietary rights of exclusion — and has been devoted to studying this phenomenon solely in the context of software development. In this paper I expand consideration of the policy implications of the apparent success of free software in two ways. First, I suggest that the phenomenon has broad implications throughout the information, knowledge, and culture economy, well beyond software development. Second, I suggest reasons to think that peer production may outperform market-based production in some
information production activities.
(Full Text)


The Constitutionalization of the Public Domain?

Yochai Benkler,
Through the Looking Glass: Alice and the Constitutional Foundations of the Public Domain
Exclusive private rights in information exist in tension with individual freedom to read and express oneself. This tension is mediated by constitutional constraints placed on Congress when it enacts such rights, constraints that in practice some lower courts have relaxed. The constraints are justified because exclusive private rights in information that are too strong entail substantial costs in terms of democracy and autonomy. . . . What is up for grabs in these debates is the way that information and culture is produced in the pervasively networked society. . . . The constitution cannot be silent or neutral in these questions. It places its thumb on the scales of freedom on the side of a robust democratic discourse, of diversity of antagonistic voices, and of individual expressive autonomy.
(Full Text)


New Papers Received from Participants:

Carol M. Rose,
Romans, Roads, And Romantic Creators: Traditions of Public Property in The Information Age
(Full Text)

Webcasts

The Second Enclosure Movement?

  • James Boyle Duke Law School

Phase I: Framing The Issues

The History and Theory of the Public Domain:
From Cheap Books to the Comedy of the Commons

  • Mark Rose University of California, Santa Barbara
  • David Lange Duke Law School
  • Jessica Litman Wayne State Law School
  • Carol Rose Yale Law School,
  • Elinor Ostrom Indiana University

The State of the Public Domain: A Report

  • Pamela Samuelson University of California.
  • Jerome Reichman Duke Law School, and Paul Uhlir, National Research Council.

Subject Area Study 1: Creativity, Appropriation, Culture and The Public Domain

  • Mark Hosler Negativland.
  • Rosemary Coombe York University, Toronto
  • David Nimmer UCLA Law School
  • Cary Sherman Recording Industry Association of America
  • David Lange Duke Law School (moderator)


Subject Area Study 2: Commodification of the Public Domain: The Challenge for Science and Innovation

  • Arti Rai University of Pennsylvania Law School.
  • Paul Uhlir National Research Council
  • Harlan J. Onsrud University of Maine Engineering
  • Stephen Berry University of Chicago, Chemistry
  • Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss New York University School of Law

Subject Area Study 3: From Anarchist Software to Peer2Peer Culture: the Public Domain in Bandwidth, Software and Content

  • Eben Moglen Columbia Law School
  • Brian Cantwell Smith Duke University
  • Larry Lessig Stanford Law School.
  • Yochai Benkler New York University School of Law (moderator)

Phase II: Developing Solutions

Public Domain Activism

  • Caspar Bowden Foundation for Information Policy Research
  • Jonathan Tasini National Writers Union
  • Gigi Sohn Public Knowledge
  • Robin Gross Electronic Frontier Foundation
  • Manon Ress
  • Jeff Chester Center for Digital Democracy
  • Jennifer Toomey Future of Music Coalition
  • Marc Rotenberg Electronic Privacy Information Center
  • David Bollier Public Knowledge, New America Foundation

Constitutionalizing the Public Domain

  • Yochai Benkler New York University Law School.
  • William Van Alystne Duke Law School
  • H. Jefferson Powell Duke Law School
  • Jed Rubenfeld Yale Law School
  • Larry Lessig Stanford Law School (moderator)

Reimagining the Public Domain

  • Julie Cohen Georgetown University Law School
  • James Boyle Duke Law School
  • John Perry Barlow Electronic Frontier Foundation
  • David Bollier Public Knowledge, New America Foundation (moderator)

Participants

  • John Perry Barlow is a retired Wyoming cattle rancher, a former lyricist for the Grateful Dead, and co-founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Since May of 1998, he has been a Fellow at Harvard Law School’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society. (Web Site)
  • Yochai Benkler is Professor at the New York University School of Law. He is the Director of the Information Law Institute and writes widely about communications policy, constitutional law and peer-to-peer production. (Web Site)
  • Stephen Berry is a Distinguished Professor of Chemistry, University of Chicago, and is Home Secretary of the National Academy of Sciences. (Web Site)
  • David Bollier is Co-Founder of Public Knowledge, the new advocacy organization for the information commons, and author of the forthcoming Silent Theft: The Private Plunder of Our Common Wealth (Routledge). Bollier is also Senior Fellow at the USC Annenberg School for Communication’s Norman Lear Center and Director of the Information Commons Project at the New America Foundation. (Web Site)
  • Caspar Bowden is Director of the Foundation for Information Policy Research, a non-profit think-tank for UK and European Internet policy. (Web Site)
  • James Boyle is a Professor at Duke Law School and the author of Shamans, Software and Spleens; Law and the Construction of the Information Society (Harvard University Press). (Web Site)
  • Jeff Chester is Executive Director of the nonprofit Center for Digital Democracy (CDD), based in Washington, DC. Through research, advocacy, and public education, CDD works to ensure that the digital media serve the public interest. It is currently focusing on preserving the Internet’s open architecture in the new broadband environment, and on the establishment of a noncommercial, interactive “online commons” for the free exchange of ideas and information among citizens. (Web Site)
  • Julie Cohen is a Professor of Law at the Georgetown University Law Center. She teaches and writes about intellectual property law and data privacy law, with particular focus on computer software and digital works and on the intersection of copyright, privacy, and the First Amendment in cyberspace. She is a member of the Advisory Board of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. Prior to joining the Georgetown faculty, she was an Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. (Web Site)
  • Rosemary Coombe is Canada Research Chair in Law, Communication and Cultural Studies at York University in Toronto. Her work on law, culture and appropriation is central to a contemporary understanding of the commons in intellectual property. Her most recent book is The Cultural Life of Intellectual Properties: Authorship, Appropriation and the Law (Duke Press, 1998). (Web Site)
  • Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss is the Pauline Newman Professor of Law at N.Y.U. School of Law. A former chemist, her research interests include intellectual property, civil procedure, privacy, and the relationship between science and law. She is currently a member of a panel of the National Academy of Sciences exploring the appropriate limits of intellectual property rights. (Web Site)
  • Rebecca Eisenberg is the Robert and Barbara Luciano Professor of Law at the University of Michigan. She is co-authoring the focus paper on biotechnology (with Rai). (Web Site)
  • Anita R. Eisenstadt has served as Assistant General Counsel at the National Science Foundation since 1990. She has represented the Foundation on a wide range of issues related to intellectual property rights and database protection. Ms. Eisenstadt coordinates NSF responses to draft legislation and works closely with the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Science and Technology Policy on intellectual property issues. (Web Site)
  • Laura N. Gasaway (Lolly) has been Director of the Law Library and Professor of Law at the University of North Carolina since 1985. She teaches courses in Intellectual Property and Cyberspace Law in the law school and Law Librarianship and Legal Resources in the School of Information and Library Science. (Web Site)
  • Jane B. Griffith is the Assistant Director for Policy Development at the National Library of Medicine (NLM). Prior to joining NLM, she worked at the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress for over 25 years, where she was a Specialist in Information Technology Policy and held several senior management positions. Ms. Griffith also served on special assignments as the Interim Director of the National Research Council’s (NRC) Computer Science and Telecommun-ications Board and as the Director of the Task Force on NRC Goals and Operations. (Web Site)
  • Robin Gross is an intellectual property attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a leading cyber-liberties organization. She specializes in intellectual property policy and digital music legal issues. She serves as Director of EFF’s Campaign for Audiovisual Free Expression (CAFÉ), which she launched in June of 1999 to explore the intersection of intellectual property law and freedom of expression related to the use of digital technology. (Web Site)
  • Charlotte Hess is Director of Library Services and Professor at Indiana University, Bloomington and the author of Common Pool Resources & Collective Action. She is co-authoring a paper on the intellectual property commons. (Web Site)
  • Mark Hosler is a member of the appropriationist group Negativland and one of the authors of Fair Use by Negativland. (Web Site)
  • David Lange is Professor of Law at Duke Law School and a writer, producer, director and production coordinator in radio, television and motion pictures. Twenty years ago, his article Recognizing the Public Domain initiated contemporary legal study of the subject. (Web Site)
  • Larry Lessig is Professor of Law at Stanford Law School. He is the author of Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace and, most recently, of The Future of Ideas. (Web Site)
  • Jessica Litman is Professor of Law at Wayne State Law School and author of Digital Copyright (Prometheus Books 2001). Among her most recent articles are Information Privacy/Information Property and Breakfast with Batman®: The Public Interest in the Advertising Age. (Web Site)
  • Steven Maurer is a California attorney specializing in intellectual property litigation who prepared a law and economics study of proposed database legislation for the National Research Council in 1998. Since then, he has specialized in studying scientific databases and how they interact with commercial incentives, and he recently completed a study of the EU’s database law for Industry Canada. He has also worked with scientists on practical efforts to build and commercialize advanced databases in physics and biology.
  • Eben Moglen is a Professor of Law at Columbia Law School and the General Counsel of the Free Software Foundation. He is the author, among many other articles, of Anarchism Triumphant: Free Software and the Death of Copyright. (Web Site)
  • David Nimmer is Of Counsel to Irell & Manella in Los Angeles, and Visiting Professor of Law at UCLA. Currently the author of Nimmer on Copyright (10 vols., Matthew Bender), he also comments frequently on contemporary issues in copyright and intellectual property. (Web Site)
  • Harlan J. Onsrud is Professor of Spatial Information Science and Engineering at the University of Maine and a research scientist with the National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (NCGIA). A scientist, engineer, and attorney, his research focuses on the analysis of legal, ethical, and institutional issues affecting the creation and use of digital spatial databases and the assessment of the social impacts of spatial technologies. He chairs the U.S. National Committee on Data for Science and Technology (CODATA). (Web Site)
  • Elinor Ostrom is Arthur F. Bentley Professor of Political Science, Indiana University, Bloomington. Her book Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action (Cambridge University Press, 1990), and her subsequent work on the subject, has had a dramatic effect on environmental policy. She will be commenting on the use of the commons literature to analyze intellectual property and public domain issues (with Hess). (Web Site)
  • David Post is Professor of Law at Temple University where he teaches intellectual property law and the law of cyberspace, and a Senior Fellow at the Tech Center at George Mason University Law School. He is also Co-Founder and Co-Editor of ICANN Watch, the Cyberspace Law Institute, and Disputes Organization. (Web Site)
  • H. Jefferson Powell has been a member of the Duke faculty since 1987. He has served in both the federal and state governments, as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General and as Principal Deputy Solicitor General in the U.S. Department of Justice, and as Special Counsel to the Attorney General of North Carolina; he has briefed and argued cases in both federal and state courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States. (Web Site)
  • Laurie Racine is the President of the Center for the Public Domain. Before joining the Center, she was the Director of the Health Sector Management Program at the Fuqua School of Business of Duke University. She has spent many years as a consultant concentrating in the arts, education and health care. (Web Site)
  • Arti Rai is an Assistant Professor at the University of Pennsylvania School of Law. She writes on patent law, biotechnology, health care regulation, and intellectual property in cyberspace. She will be writing with Rebecca Eisenberg, on the public domain in biotechnology research. (Web Site)
  • Jerome Reichman is Bunyan S. Womble Professor of Law at Duke Law School. His latest writings stress the need for new liability rules to stimulate investment in small-scale innovation not susceptible to trade secret protection in order to cure market failure. He has been special advisor to the United States National Academy of Sciences, and the International Council for Science (ICSU) on the subject of legal protection for databases. (Web Site)
  • Manon Ress works for Essential Information, a Washington, DC- based non-profit created about 20 years ago by Ralph Nader and John Richard. Essential Information provides information to journalists, activists and consumers all over the world (http://www.essential.org).She works on various e-commerce and consumer protection issues such as the definition of consumers, unfair contracts and tort liabilities and on issues related to internet governance such as free speech, privacy protections and fair use rights. Since October 2000, she has been a consumer representative on the US Delegation to the Proposed Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters.
  • Carol Rose is Gordon Bradford Tweedy Professor of Law at Yale Law School. Among her many articles is The Comedy of the Commons, a reexamination of Hardin’s famous Tragedy of the Commons to identify those cases in which common property regimes actually work better than exclusionary private property regimes. (Web Site)
  • Mark Rose is Professor and Chair of the English Department at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He is the author of Authors and Owners: The Invention of Copyright, one of the most distinguished histories of the development of ideas about copyright. (Web Site)
  • Marc Rotenberg is Director (and Founder) of the Electronic Privacy Information Center and one of the world’s leading authorities on privacy issues. (Web Site)
  • Jed Rubenfeld is Robert R. Slaughter Professor of Law at Yale Law School. His work on privacy, affirmative action and constitutional interpretation has reshaped the debate in each of these fields. His book Freedom and Time: A Theory of Constitutional Self-Government was published by Yale University Press in March, 2001. (Web Site)
  • Eric Saltzman is the Executive Director of Harvard’s Center on Internet and Society. A former criminal defense attorney, and documentary film-maker, Mr. Saltzman produced and directed “The Shooting of Big Man: Anatomy of a Criminal Case.” (Web Site)
  • Pamela Samuelson is a Professor at the University of California at Berkeley with a joint appointment in the School of Information Management and Systems and the School of Law. She is also Co-Director of the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology. Her principal area of expertise is intellectual property law. She has written and spoken extensively about the challenges that new information technologies are posing for public policy and traditional legal regimes and is an advisor for the Samuelson Law, Technology and Public Policy Clinic. (Web Site)
  • Cary Sherman is Senior Executive Vice President and General Counsel to the Recording Industry Association of America. Formerly a senior partner and head of the Intellectual Property & Technology Practice Group of Arnold & Porter, Washington, D.C., he has devoted his professional career to copyright and related issues. (Web Site)
  • Brian Cantwell Smith is the Kimberly Jenkins Professor of New Technologies and Society at Duke University. Before coming to Duke he was principal scientist at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center (PARC), Adjunct Professor of Philosophy and Founder of the Center for the Study of Language and Information at Stanford University, and the first President of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility. (Web Site)
  • Gigi Sohn is the President of Public Knowledge, a new nonprofit organization that will represent the public’s perspective on intellectual property and related matters. A former Executive Director of the Media Access Project and Ford Foundation Project Specialist, Ms. Sohn is also an Adjunct Professor at Cardozo Law School, where she teaches a course on federal regulation of the electronic media, and a Senior Fellow at the University of Melbourne Faculty of Law, Graduate Studies Program.
  • Jonathan Tasini has been President of the National Writers Union (UAW Local 1981) since 1990. He is a labor and economics writer whose work has appeared in a variety of newspapers and magazines. He was the lead plaintiff in a recent Supreme Court case about freelance authors’ rights in online databases. (Web Site)
  • Jennifer Toomey is an activist, musician and the Executive Director of the Future of Music Coalition. From 1990 to 1998, she co-ran Simple Machines, an independent record label. She is a member of the board of The Low Power Radio Coalition, performed in several bands including Tsunami, and has written extensively about music and Internet technology. (Web Site)
  • Paul Uhlir is Director of International Scientific and Technical Information Programs at The National Research Council in Washington, D.C., where he directs policy studies and related activities for the federal government. (Web Site)
  • William Van Alystne is the William R. & Thomas S. Perkins Professor of Law at Duke Law School and one of the pre-eminent First Amendment and constitutional law scholars in the United States. His professional writings have appeared during four decades in the principal law journals in the United States with frequent republication in foreign journals.. (Web Site)