<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: CAL v the Schools &#8211; update</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lawfont.com/2006/03/24/cal-v-the-schools-update/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/03/24/cal-v-the-schools-update/</link>
	<description>an analysis of law, technology, economics, and policy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Dec 2011 19:59:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: LawFont &#187; CAL v The Schools - another update</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/03/24/cal-v-the-schools-update/comment-page-1/#comment-119</link>
		<dc:creator>LawFont &#187; CAL v The Schools - another update</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Apr 2006 04:33:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2006/03/24/cal-v-the-schools-update/#comment-119</guid>
		<description>[...] I&#8217;ve blogged here, and more extensively here, about a case before the Copyright Tribunal, in which CAL and the Schools are seeking a determination on how much schools should pay for &#8216;electronic uses&#8217; of copyright material. I&#8217;ve been concerned (amazed, appalled) by one of the arguments being made in the case: that where a teacher tells a student to view a website (yes, a freely available, open access website) there should be a payment to copyright owners. I&#8217;ve pointed out at length why I think this is a simply unsustainable argument. Now we have a Tribunal decision on what should be done pending determination of that argument. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I&#8217;ve blogged here, and more extensively here, about a case before the Copyright Tribunal, in which CAL and the Schools are seeking a determination on how much schools should pay for &#8216;electronic uses&#8217; of copyright material. I&#8217;ve been concerned (amazed, appalled) by one of the arguments being made in the case: that where a teacher tells a student to view a website (yes, a freely available, open access website) there should be a payment to copyright owners. I&#8217;ve pointed out at length why I think this is a simply unsustainable argument. Now we have a Tribunal decision on what should be done pending determination of that argument. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

