Doctors clindamycin gel online may use EEGs when a person has a mild traumatic buy cheap cialis internet brain injury (mTBI) to help them assess and monitor cognitive buy drops online without prescription function. This type of hemochromatosis occurs due to another problem xalatan no prescription or health condition that leads to excessive iron accumulation. For ventolin no prescription information about the effectiveness of Yaz, see the "Yaz use buy viagra no prescription required for birth control" and "Yaz other uses" sections below. According discount betnovate to the CFF, there are several options, including medication, nutritional cipro without a prescription therapies, and fitness routines. These are the overall screening recommendations, generic tetracycline but a doctor can advise each person about their screening purchase artane online needs. However, instead of starting as one extension that splits buy robaxin internet into two, the structures grow independently out of the cell griseofulvin low price body. For those who do not wish to conceive, they buy erythromycin on internet can speak with a healthcare professional about which contraception options may.

The discussions about how the Google Book settlement proposes to handle orphan works have expanded. A small group of which I am a member have formally sought to intervene. So has the Internet Archive. Today the NYT Bits Blog has a brief explanation, and some good commentary.

There have also been three articles that take up the settlement in a more serious way:

Randy Picker, “The Google Book Search Settlement: A New Orphan-works Monopoly?” Picker is an anti-trust lawyer. It’s a longish paper (though not by law review standards), but the first few pages provide a good summary.

Pamela Samuelson: “Legally Speaking: The Dead Souls of the Google Book Settlement.” An excellent, clear, short critique of the settlement. Easy to read for the layperson, highly recommended. This will be Samuelson’s column in the July issue of the Communications of the ACM.

James Grimmelmann, “The Google Book Settlement: Ends, Means, and the Future of Books” (pdf, 17 pages). An issues brief, thoughtful and analytical and complete.

I urge anyone interested to read the Samuelson piece in particular.

This entry was posted on Saturday, April 18th, 2009 at 11:06 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.