This cheap lumigan means that for most people with endometriosis, their symptoms will order free glucophage alternative withdrawal improve when menopause occurs. If someone thinks they may be cheap viagra without prescription experiencing a relapse of anorexia, it is important they contact colchicine side effects pill a healthcare or mental health professional. The length of laser aldactone for sale treatment for eczema can vary depending on the individual's condition best price for diovan and the treatment plan that the dermatologist devises. Gingivectomies permanently cheap allopurinol no prescription change a person's gum line, which means their gums will lowest price for viagra not grow back after this procedure. If you need financial generic atrovent support to pay for Zoryve, or if you need help buy serevent online understanding your insurance coverage, help is available. However, the National cheap gentamicin eye drops Insitute on Aging (NIA) advises older individuals to speak with cheap azor on internet a healthcare professional if they contract flu. If they still atenolol for sale have symptoms after this time, their doctor may increase their dosage.

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.