Conservative Think Tanks and the Media Given the growing political importance of media most think tanks - especially conservative ones in the U.S. - have clearly stated the need for strong marketing and communications. The former president of the American Enterprise Institute, William Baroody puts it that way "We pay as much attention to the dissemination of the product as we do to the content. ... We hire ghost writers for scholars to produce op-ed articles that are sent to the one hundred and one co-operating newspapers three pieces every two weeks ... The real test is getting your message out. ... Market your policy recommendations, market the principles and values behind them, market the tangible publications and events your organization is producing. Market the think tank concept itself. Then market your specific organization." Relations with the media form one of the most important element within the think tanks marketing strategies. The Hoover Institution's public affairs office, for example, links to 900 media centers across the U.S. and 450 abroad. The Reason Foundation, a strong fighter for privatization, had 359 television and radio appearances in 1995 and more than 1,500 citations in national newspapers and magazines. Furthermore the Manhattan Institute has held more than 600 forums on briefings for journalists and policy makers on a broad range of public policy issues. Not to leave the distribution of their respective ideologies to chance, conservative institutions have created a variety of conservative-controlled media outlets and projects, as well as television and radio broadcasting networks. The Free Congress Foundation for instance, in addition to its National Empowerment Television, publishes NetNewsNow, a broadcast fax letter sent to more than 400 U.S. radio producers. Conservative foundations also spent US$ 2,734,263 on four right-of -center magazines between 1990 and 1993, providing publishing opportunities for conservative thinkers and policy advocates.

TEXTBLOCK 1/1 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611704/100438658478

Intellectual property Intellectual property, very generally, relates to the output that result from intellectual activity in the industrial, scientific, literary and artistic fields. Traditionally intellectual property is divided into two branches: 1) industrial property (inventions, marks, industrial designs, unfair competition and geographical indications), and 2) copyright. The protection of intellectual property is guaranteed through a variety of laws, which grant the creators of intellectual goods, and services certain time-limited rights to control the use made of their products.

INDEXCARD, 1/3

Liability of ISPs ISPs (Internet Service Provider), BBSs (Bulletin Board Service Operators), systems operators and other service providers (in the U.S.) can usually be hold liable for infringing activities that take place through their facilities under three theories: 1) direct liability: to establish direct infringement liability there must be some kind of a direct volitional act, 2) contributory liability: a party may be liable for contributory infringement where "... with knowledge of the infringing activity, [it] induces, causes or materially contributes to the infringing activity of another." Therefore a person must know or have reason to know that the subject matter is copyrighted and that particular uses violated copyright law. There must be a direct infringement of which the contributory infringer has knowledge, and encourages or facilitates for contributory infringement to attach, and 3) vicarious liability: a party may be vicariously liable for the infringing acts of another if it a) has the right and ability to control the infringer's acts and b) receives a direct financial benefit from the infringement. Unlike contributory infringement, knowledge is not an element of vicarious liability.

INDEXCARD, 2/3

DMCA The DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) was signed into law by U.S. President Clinton in 1998 and implements the two 1996 WIPO treaties (WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty and WIPO Copyright Treaty). Besides other issues the DMCA addresses the influence of new technologies on traditional copyright. Of special interest in the context of the digitalization of intellectual property are the titles no. 2, which refers to the limitation on the liability of online service providers for copyright infringement (when certain conditions are met), no. 3, that creates an exemption for making a copy of a computer program in case of maintenance and repair, and no. 4 which is concerned with the status of libraries and webcasting. The DCMA has been widely criticized for giving copyright-holders even more power and damage the rights and freedom of consumers, technological innovation, and the free market for information.

INDEXCARD, 3/3