Over at Randy Picker’s MobBlog on Grokster and BrandX, the participants have started the analysis before the Court has issued its opinions. Phil Weiser (here and here) and Jim Speta (here) kick off a very thoughtful conversation on both the merits and the potential significance of BrandX.
Even though I’m not a telecomm guy, I tend to agree with Jim that BrandX may turn out to be the “bigger” of the two cases. Back in December, I posted my own brief account of what I see as at least one of the conceptual connections between them.
3 responses so far ↓
1 The Importance of... // Jun 24, 2005 at 12:34 pm
Grokster + Brand X = Issues of Openness? It’s All About the Distribution, Baby!
Prof. Michael Madison points to the debate over Brand X that is starting on Picker MobBlog (MobBlawg LiftOff). [Btw, Picker calls his site MobBlog. I like Madison's MobBlawg better.] Michael agrees with one of the MobBlawggers that Brand X may…
2 The Importance of... // Jun 24, 2005 at 12:41 pm
Grokster + Brand X = Issues of Openness? It’s All About the Distribution, Baby!
Prof. Michael Madison points to the debate over Brand X that is starting on Picker MobBlog (MobBlawg LiftOff). [Btw, Picker calls his site MobBlog. I like Madison's MobBlawg better.] Michael agrees with one of the MobBlawggers that Brand X may…
3 Picker MobBlog // Jun 24, 2005 at 3:19 pm
Competition and Openness
Nomenclature and then substance. So the early vote is in (here and here): we should be “MobBlawg” and not “MobBlog.” MobBlog was suggested by Doug Lichtman as we were emailing back and forth and, in truth, I have a