[WSIS CS-Plenary] Cyber/Jurisdiction and Jurisprudence. (also Re: [Wsis-pct] IP-Watch: Intellectual Property Issues ...)

[l.d.misek-falkoff falkoff]

Greetings:

Just appreciatively responding to the present post on topics which seem to
be 'eclipsed' sometimes - and requesting off-list any prior posts that seem
to be on the following topic.

I write to mention that *CyberJurisdiction* is a real broad as well as
topically local matter.  My own experience with *CyberTort* actions
(distinguished from *CyberCrime*, but with some common aspects) is that
judges can be very "interesting" in how they construe 'who can reach whom'
in what kinds of claims.

We have a whole new generation taking the Bench(es) now, who are seasoned
netizens, but prior courts have laid down some pretty heavy limiting
concepts about how far away people might be such that a court cannot/does
not care to  reach them (bring them under court authority).

For us here, fractions of a nanosecond (please instruct on current
terminology) might not seem very far away.  Just a sidebar on IP, which does
include who can assert claims against others depending on Jurisdictional
parameters.

Fallut:  sometimes Intellectual Property discussions can get sidelined not
only per their own substance but because of implications for matters of
jurisdictional authority - not a tiny topic and not all that simple.  Today.
As we type.

If of interest, just "wave,"
and sending very best wishes, LDMF.

Linda D. Misek-Falkoff, Ph.D., J.D..
Individual e-post.  For i.d.: * Respectful Interfaces *.
Programme of the Communications Coordination Commitee for the United
Nations..


On 12/10/05, Richard M. Stallman <rms at gnu.org> wrote:
>
> [Please note that by using 'REPLY', your response goes to the entire list.
> Kindly use individual addresses for responses intended for specific people]
>
> Click http://wsis.funredes.org/plenary/ to access automatic translation of
> this message!
> _______________________________________
>
>    Forgive me if I misunderstood, but i thought that the consensus, or
>    at least rough consensus, in this WG was that the WGIG/WSIS should
>    stay away from the topic of IP unless it could be transformed into
>    the discussion on PCT.
>
> That is basically what I was saying too.
> Perhaps I did not express myself clearly.
> _______________________________________________
> Plenary mailing list
> Plenary at wsis-cs.org
> http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20051211/04f247e5/attachment.htm