| |||||||||||||
Extranational issuesExtranational issuesPosted Oct 1, 2005 8:52 UTC (Sat) by job (guest, #670)Parent article: The Authors' Guild and Google Print
How much of the LWN reader base is outside the US? I ask because I am honestly tired of articles discussing US law cases, without any explanation how the your law system works, or what legislation is involved in this particular case. All this is impossible to understand from the outside.
Not only is all this uninteresting since we on the other side of the ocean lacks the background knowledge to understand the politics involved (which on the other hand does not seem to set us apart from most other readers), but it is also a bit tedious to constantly be reminded about the sort of ethnocentrism where "the law" is a reference to a specific one.
This problem is also well reflected in the comments, where people discuss their respective countries' implementation of the Berne convention and no one understands the other.
(Log in to post comments)
Extranational issues Posted Oct 1, 2005 13:54 UTC (Sat) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] LWN's readership is roughly 40% US, 40% Europe, 20% everywhere else (with Australia and India fairly strongly represented). We cover US law heavily for two reasons: (1) we're in the middle of it, and it's the most visible to us, and (2) like it or not, what happens here often gets exported elsewhere.That said, we do try to stay on top of what's happening elsewhere, and cover it when we can. The European patent situation may be the most obvious case, but there are others. And (hint) if we had writers willing to do articles on interesting developments in their legal systems, we'd have more coverage. As for the language, it's a constant challenge to write with a true global point of view. Localisms creep in all the time, from references to "the law," or "foreign countries," or "happening in the Spring." We work at it, honest.
Extranational issues Posted Oct 6, 2005 12:50 UTC (Thu) by zotz (guest, #26117) [Link] "what happens here often gets exported elsewhere."
If that were the only direction of flow, things would be bad, but not as bad as they are.
As it stands, countries are playing a game of leap frog under the guise of "harmonization."
all the best,
global issues Posted Oct 7, 2005 1:56 UTC (Fri) by xoddam (subscriber, #2322) [Link] LWN's reporting is among the least 'national' of any publication I'veever read. The coverage here of happenings (including legal issues) across Europe, India, China, South American countries, Taiwan, Africa (well at least South Africa), Japan, Australia and the US is very impressive indeed. Unfortunately we do get limited reportage from places where a limited proportion of people speak English. It's not exactly coincidental that English-speaking countries (and those where large numbers speak good English as a second tongue) are the places where free software and related technologies are most widely developed (the reasons concern empire, wealth, education, communication and commercial opportunities). The fact that US legal issues are reported here reflects exactly the disproportionate influence of America in trade. If you wish to trade with the world, it pays to trade with America. If you wish to trade with America, it is useful (often compulsory) to make yourself amenable to American business, which is what America itself has done, surprisingly enough. Moreover bilateral 'free trade' agreements between the USA and other countries explicitly *oblige* countries to align their legal framework, especially copyright and patent laws, with that of the US. And although LWN does not exist to inform the world about the US legal system, articles here and at Groklaw (regularly linked from LWN, and you'll notice that the article here was written by the editor of Groklaw) have done an excellent job of explaining how the system works and how it is 'gamed' by various players. (I use America interchangeably with US because that's standard English-language usage. People south of the US in non-English-speaking countries often use 'American' as a collective adjective for people from the American continent(s), but English speakers north of the US get offended if you call them Americans).
|
|||||||||||||