Right now Obama is receiving his Nobel Peace prize in Oslo (live webcast), meanwhile in Stockholm the other prizewinners are arriving and preparing for the ceremony tonight. I am on my way up to Stockholm but not for the Nobel ceremony & dinner but for a two day meeting. I would have preferred to have coffee with Elinor Ostrom.
This was also a special date as it used to be my grandmothers birthday. No more.
I spend a lot of my time on trains between Göteborg & Stockholm. After a quick look through my scanty records I have been to Stockholm (at least) 13 times this year (by train) which makes it a distance of 12 688 km traveled over an estimated time of over 80 hours. If these trips were all put end-to-end this is approximately the distance from Göteborg to Perth, Australia.
but I could not have taken the train…
Copyriot writes that on Wednesday 11 March the Technical Museum in Stockholm will be hosting a panel discussion on the suggested Ipred-law. Wish I was in Stockholm in time for this event.
The Pirate Bay trial is into it’s fourth day and is being reported by bloggers, tweeters, reporters and commentators. It is almost impossible to miss this media event. This is also part of the problem since the trial itself has become larger than life and more interesting than the actual law. In reality the participants are less than exciting and the law plods along in its usual manner.
Things worth noting so far:
The prosecutor strangely decided to alter the charges (dropping copying and focusing on making available) – this is not uncommon but it was strange that it should occur on day two after a year of preparations. At the same time this doesn’t alter much even though it may importantly effect the damages that can be awarded.
The decription of the bittorent technology involved was badly explained. This is even more surprising as the prosecutors description of the facts should have been acceptable to all. Instead everyone is left with the impression that the prosecutor and his surrounding team is not tech savvy at all.
One of the defence lawyers used the “King Kong defence” when he stated that the prosecutor must show that the defendant has personally interacted with the copyright infringer. Even many users use aliases like King Kong and may well be in the jungles of Cambodia the prosecutor must show such personal interaction. This is a development of the Chewbacca defense.
