The buy cheap arcoxia online usa symptoms may also become more difficult to treat if a cheap viagra no rx person does not address any underlying causes. The lymphatic system order spiriva consists of lymphocytes known as B lymphocytes (B cells) and cheapest betnovate T lymphocytes (T cells). Considering this, in combination with limited buy generic tizanidine evidence suggesting its effectiveness in helping with different conditions, it cipro without prescription is best for a person to consider discussing turmeric supplements griseofulvin sale with a doctor before buying them. There are several different order quinine types of HH gene a person can inherit, and they cialis tablets each affect iron absorption in different ways. The cost of generic cialis LDCT scans can vary depending on the person's location and find cialis online the institution offering the scan. Side effects may occur due purchase diclofenac online to the caffeine content in the substances, particularly if people order accutane consume them in high doses. Someone experiencing any side effects or.

That is thee title of a superb column by Pamela Samuelson explaining some (but only some) of the worries about the proposed settlement of copyright infringement claims against Google for scanning copyrighted works. She explains the perverse incentives to both parties to this litigation. In a word, each realized that they could become literary monopolists if they played their cards right with each other.

That is exactly the reason why the federal judiciary gets involved in settlements that private parties have negotiated with each other in class action cases. There is too much risk that the parties will find a way to divide the pie between themselves in a way that does not serve the public well.

And, of course, the public would gain much from the settlement. Advocates for the disabled are urging the judge to approve it because it would expand access to works that can be mechanically vocalized. And so it would, at a huge cost o competition, openness, privacy, and various other pitfalls.

It may not matter, if the Department of Justice decides the settlement has serious anti-trust implications, as it certainly seems to. (You can read the DOJ’s curt letter to Google at that site, thanks to DocStoc.)

This entry was posted on Tuesday, August 11th, 2009 at 2:51 pm and is filed under Open Access, Owning bits—copyright. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.