There are a couple of news stories out this week that have caught my attention and actually managed to raise my ire just a bit. In my opinion, it just goes to show that double standards exist everywhere… ESPECIALLY when money is involved.

I was reading Tweeting for Twouble by Patricio Robles over at eConsultancy. It recaps a couple of stories from the past week including a very interesting one out of Arkansas about a juror who sent out a couple of updates via Twitter about the case he was hearing. Included in those not infamous Tweets:

So, Johnathan, what did you do today? Oh, nothing really. I just gave away TWELVE MILLION DOLLARS of somebody else’s money!

and the real killer…

Oh, and nobody buy Stoam. It’s bad mojo, and they’ll probably cease to exist, now that their wallet is $12M lighter

In that case the defendant lost and was ordered to pay $12 million dollars. He is now appealing that verdict based on a claim of juror misconduct regarding the Tweets…and he’ll probably get it. Then both sides have to pay their lawyers to do this all over again.

As interesting as that is…

…that’s not what caught my attention in the story. It was, in fact, a comment by Robles toward the end. What was said? I’m glad you asked!

Obviously this isn’t Twitter’s fault; Twitter is just a tool.

Really? This isn’t Twitter’s fault? Why not?

If I remember correctly, Napster was just a tool that helped users find other users that had files they were interested in. Yes, it was used most often for sharing music files BUT SO WHAT! The point is the files were never in the posession of Napster, in fact the file exchange actually happened via a peer-to-peer connection between the two users. And yet Napster was found to be “liable for contributory infringement of the plaintiff’s copyright; and … for vicarious infringement of the plaintiff’s copyright¹.” Twitter actually stores the messages and THEN forwards them. Beyond the title of the file being shared, Napster didn’t know anything about the content of the file while Twitter stores and indexes the content of the updates it sends out.

I’ve made a similar argument before that Napster was really no different that Xerox and JVC (with the VCR) yet neither of them were shut down for enabling anonymous users to violate the copyright of original producers. Why not? If Napster can be found guilty of “vicarious infringement of the plaintiff’s copyright” how is it that Xerox and every other copier company cannot? (hint: better lawyers maybe?)

Don’t get me wrong, I love Twitter and I don’t think they’ve done anything wrong in the cited case. I just want to point out the obvious double standard that has been applied. And now that there is money on the line over this case, and others, will someone start looking at Twitter the same way they looked at Napster?

¹A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004, 1013, 1020 (9th Cir. 2001)

Not sure about you, but I’ve thought so for a long time! I had a chance to watch it again tonight and thought, “Hey, what a great movie!” and naturally that led me right here of course!

The movie stars Robert Redford, Sidney Poitier, David Strathairn, Dan Aykroyd, River Phoenix and of course Mary McDonnell. It chronicles the adventures of Martin Bishop (Redford) as he leads his group of merry men who specialize in testing security systems. When he’s backed into a corner by the government for some college indescressions, he and his team steal THE cryptography black box and enter into a game of danger and intrigue!

Its a somewhat ligh-hearted and all too geeky formula for a good techy movie, especially in 1992 when it was released. Now, most of the “high-tech” security systems they show being tested in the movie, we see every day.

But my favorite part of the movie comes in a dialog between Kingsley’s character and Redford’s Bishop.

The world isn’t run by weapons anymore, or energy, or money. Its run by little ones and zeroes, little bits of data. its all just electrons!

HOT OFF THE PRESSES, JUST ANNOUNCED ON ENTRECARD SITE…. Entrecard is Launching a Third Party Ad Network and a Credit Cashout Service

Entrecard will buy back your credits for actual money! Why is this such a big deal? Well simply put, because Entrecard has just been a way to drive traffic until now. And most of that traffic NEVER converted ANYTHING! Well now, you don’t need to have them convert, you just need the Entrecard Credits because Entrecard will buy them back from you!

No word yet on what the rate will be, apparently a couple of things with this plan are still up in the air, but its pretty good news in my book! Especially for those “power droppers” that can rack up points pretty quickly!

In the same announcement, the good folks over at Entrecard also put out the word that they are going to be making their ad spots available to outside advertisers in a CPM modes. The revenue derived from these ad sales is what they will use to buy back our credits

I’m sure there will be much debate and much more info coming on this topic. Stay tuned for more!