<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>LawFont.com &#187; Broadcasting</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lawfont.com/category/broadcasting/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lawfont.com</link>
	<description>an analysis of law, technology, economics, and policy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:57:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Convergence review invites submissions</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/04/28/convergence-review-invites-submissions/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/04/28/convergence-review-invites-submissions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2011 02:47:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sarah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadcasting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spectrum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telco]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=1040</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Australian government&#8217;s Convergence Review Committee has released a Framing Paper and invited public submissions on what principles should guide the review over the next year. The principles currently proposed span across broadcasting, telecommunications, and radiocommunication issues (although the bias is towards broadcasting content issues): 1. Australians should have access to a diversity of voices, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/04/28/convergence-review-invites-submissions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Convergence review terms of reference announced</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/03/02/convergence-review-terms-of-reference-announced/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/03/02/convergence-review-terms-of-reference-announced/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2011 02:10:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sarah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadcasting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spectrum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telco]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=939</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The final terms of reference for the upcoming Convergence Review to be conducted by the Australian government have been announced, following on the draft terms of reference provided for public comment in December. At the Australian Broadcasting Summit this morning, Senator Stephen Conroy, the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Ditital Economy, noted that the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/03/02/convergence-review-terms-of-reference-announced/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Draft terms of reference for Australian &#8220;convergence&#8221; review released</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2010/12/16/draft-terms-of-reference-for-australian-convergence-review-released/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2010/12/16/draft-terms-of-reference-for-australian-convergence-review-released/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2010 01:07:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sarah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadcasting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spectrum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telco]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=842</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The draft Terms of Reference for the Government&#8217;s review of the laws relating to the converged media and communications industry have been published. Part of a FAQ on the website of the Department for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, which is conducting the review, notes that: * &#8216;Convergence&#8217; describes the trend whereby devices (such [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2010/12/16/draft-terms-of-reference-for-australian-convergence-review-released/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rabbit ears make a comeback</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2010/12/08/rabbit-ears-make-a-comeback/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2010/12/08/rabbit-ears-make-a-comeback/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 06:15:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sarah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Broadcasting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=823</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It seems that digital television broadcasts in the United States are increasingly being received not via subscription television, but over the airwaves with the help of an old-style technology: rabbit ears. Viewers who are either unwilling or unable to pay for increasingly expensive cable or satellite television are turning to free-to-air television, with the help [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2010/12/08/rabbit-ears-make-a-comeback/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Podcasts, Webinars (next Friday!) and other ways to learn more about IP</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2009/02/24/podcasts-webinars-next-friday-and-other-ways-to-learn-more-about-ip/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2009/02/24/podcasts-webinars-next-friday-and-other-ways-to-learn-more-about-ip/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 06:43:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All jurisdictions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadcasting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cool]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=757</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve discovered podcasts. Yes, I know it&#8217;s a little late in the piece, but really, it&#8217;s been a pretty recent thing: since I (a) got an iPhone and (b) started walking to work every day. At half an hour each day, I get a lot of listening done and music doesn&#8217;t quite do it for [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2009/02/24/podcasts-webinars-next-friday-and-other-ways-to-learn-more-about-ip/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Australian Censorship Issue Event at UNSW next Thursday</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/11/21/australian-censorship-issue-event-at-unsw-next-thursday/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/11/21/australian-censorship-issue-event-at-unsw-next-thursday/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 06:40:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadcasting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Events]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=694</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I mentioned yesterday the current debate over internet censorship in Australia. I should, at the same time, have mentioned a free event that UNSW&#8217;s Baker &#038; McKenzie Cyberspace Law and Policy Centre is having next Thursday. Full webpage here with speakers/program/etc. Here&#8217;s the short version: The UNSW Cyberspace Law and Policy Centre is hosting a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/11/21/australian-censorship-issue-event-at-unsw-next-thursday/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>IceTV granted special leave</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/08/26/icetv-granted-special-leave/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/08/26/icetv-granted-special-leave/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 05:32:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Broadcasting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=654</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You heard it first &#8230; everywhere else. I know. House of Commons has reported it, as have assiduous commenters on this blog. But for those who didn&#8217;t know: IceTV has been granted special leave. More commentary from House of Commons here. My previous commentary here and here; Bill Patry here. For my money, read David [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/08/26/icetv-granted-special-leave/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>More on the IceTV judgment</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/05/12/more-on-the-icetv-judgment/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/05/12/more-on-the-icetv-judgment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 May 2008 22:15:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadcasting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2008/05/12/more-on-the-icetv-judgment/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Following up from my long post on the case, some more comments and things on IceTV that are interesting: This thread discussing the decision in the Digital TV Forum This post on the case, with a reference to a really interesting paper by Kathy Bowrey on digital television and copyright; The responding press release from [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/05/12/more-on-the-icetv-judgment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>All our program guides are belongs to us</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/05/09/all-our-program-guides-are-belongs-to-us/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/05/09/all-our-program-guides-are-belongs-to-us/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 23:51:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadcasting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2008/05/09/all-our-program-guides-are-belongs-to-us/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As I flagged yesterday, yesterday morning the appeal judgment in the IceTV case was handed down by the Full Federal Court. This truly was an all-stars copyright case: interesting issues, an all-star IP bench (including the CJ himself, plus two senior IP heavies &#8211; Justices Lindgren and Sackville) (note too &#8211; the same bench that [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/05/09/all-our-program-guides-are-belongs-to-us/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>IceTV judgment handed down</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/05/08/icetv-judgment-handed-down/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/05/08/icetv-judgment-handed-down/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 08:21:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadcasting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2008/05/08/icetv-judgment-handed-down/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just a quick note: the Full Federal Court judgment in IceTV is now up on AustLII. The case concerns the electronic program guide for television: Channel Nine sued a company which was providing the EPG for people wanting to make fully functional use of digital television recorders. Background on the case here. At first instance, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/05/08/icetv-judgment-handed-down/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

