“Legit can’t wait for #Toronto #WorldPride!”: Investigating the Twitter public of a large-scale LGBTQ Festival

This article investigates whether participation on Twitter during Toronto’s 2014 WorldPride festival facilitated challenges to heteronormativity through increased visibility, connections, and messages about LGBTQ people. Analysis of 68,231 tweets found that surges in activity using WorldPride hashtags, connections among users, and the circulation of affective content with common symbols made celebrations visible. However, the platform’s features catered to politicians, celebrities, and advertisers in ways that accentuated self-promotional, local, and often banal content, overshadowing individual users and the festival’s global mandate. By identifying Twitter’s limits in fostering the visibility of users and messages that circulate nonnormative discourses, this study makes way for future research identifying alternative platform dynamics that can enhance the visibility of diversity.

Carbon concentration dependent grain growth of Cu2ZnSnS4thin films

Organic solvents are commonly used in ink precursors of Cu2ZnSnS4 (CZTS) nanocrystals to make thin films for applications such as solar cells. However, the traces of carbon residual left behind by the organic solvents after high-temperature annealing is generally considered to restrict the growth of nanocrystals to form large grains. This work reported the first systematic study on the influence of carbon content of organic solvents on the grain growth of CZTS nanomaterial during high temperature sulfurization annealing. Solvents with carbon atom per molecule varying from 3 to 10 were used to made ink of CZTS nanocrystals for thin film deposition. It has been found that, after high temperature sulfurization annealing, a bilayer structure was formed in the CZTS film using organic solvent containing 3 carbon atoms per solvent molecule based on glycerol and 1,3-propanediol. The top layer consisted of closelypacked large grains and the bottom layer was made of as-synthesized nanoparticles. In contrast, the CZTS film made with the solvent molecule with more carbon atoms including 1,5-pentanediol (5 carbon atoms) and 1,7-heptanediol (7 carbon atoms) consisted of nanoparticles embedded with large crystals. It is believed that the carbon residues left behind by the organic solvents affected the necking of CZTS nanocrystals to form large grains through influencing the surface property of nanocrystals. Furthermore, it has also been observed that the solvent affected the thickness of MoS2 layer which was formed between CZTS and Mo substrate. A thinner MoS2 film (50 nm) was obtained with the slurry using carbon-rich terpineol as solvent whereas the thickest MoS2 (350 nm) was obtained with the film made from 1,3-propanediol based solvent. The evaluation of the photoactivity of the CZTS thin films has demonstrated that a higher photocurrent was generated with the film containing more large grains.

The road to Copenhagen: Intellectual property and climate change

In the lead-up to the discussions over IP and climate change in Copenhagen in 2009, the US House of Representatives passed a resolution that it should be the policy of US government officials in discussions over the long-term action under the United Nations Framework on Climate Change to ‘prevent any weakening of, and ensure robust compliance with and enforcement of, existing international legal requirements as of the date of the enactment of this Act for the protection of IP rights related to energy or environmental technology’.

Mauve: How one man invented the colour that changed the world

In an essay, "The Books of Last Things", Delia Falconer discusses the emergence of a new genre in publishing - microhistories. She cites a number of recent titles in non-fiction and fiction - Longitude, Cod, Tulips, Pushkin's Button, Nathaniel's Nutmeg, Zarafa, The Surgeon of Crowthorne, The Potato, The Perfect Storm. Delia Falconer observes of this tradition: "One has the sense, reading these books, of a surprising weight, of pleasant shock. In part, it is because we are looking at things which are generally present around us, but modestly out of sight and mind - historical nitty gritty like cod, potatoes, longitudinal clocks - which the authors have thrust suddenly, like a Biblical visitation of frogs or locusts, in our face. Things like spice and buttons and clocks are generally seen to enable history on the large scale, but are not often viewed as its worthy subjects. And by the same grand logic of history, more unusual phenomena like cabinets of curiosities or glass-making or farm lore or sailors' knots are simply odd blips on its radar screen, interesting footnotes. These new books, microhistories, reverse the usual order of history, which argues from the general to the particular, in order to prove its inevitable progress. They start from the footnotes. But by reversing the process, and walking through the back door of history, you don't necessarily end up at the front of the same house." Delia Falconer speculates about the reasons for the popularity of microhistories. She concludes: "I would like to think that reading them is not simply an exercise in nostalgia, but a challenge to the present". In Mauve, Simon Garfield provides a new way of thinking and writing about the history of intellectual property. Instead of providing a grand historical narrative of intellectual property, he tells the story of a particular invention, and its exploitation. Simon Garfield relates how English chemist William Perkin accidentally discovered a way to mass-produce colour mauve in a factory. Working on a treatment for malaria in his London home laboratory, Perkin failed to produce artificial quinine. Instead he created a dark oily sludge that turned silk a beautiful light purple. The colour was unique and became the most desirable shade in the fashion houses of Paris and London. ... The book Mauve will have a number of contemporary resonances for intellectual property lawyers and academics. Simon Garfield emphasizes the difficulties inherent in commercialising an invention and managing intellectual property. He investigates the uneasy collaboration between industry and science. Simon Garfield suggests that complaints about the efficacy of patent offices are perennial. He also highlights the problems faced by courts and law-makers in accommodating new technologies within the logic of patent law. In his elegant microhistory of the colour mauve, Simon Garfield confirms the conclusion of Brad Sherman and Lionel Bently that many aspects of modern intellectual property law can only be understood through an understanding of the past: "The image of intellectual property law that developed during the 19th century and the narrative of identity which this engendered played and continue to play an important role in the way we think about and understand intellectual property law".

The Australia-Chile free trade agreement 2008: Intellectual property and development. A submission to the Joint Standing Committee on treaties

A submission to the Joint Standing Committee on treaties

Harry Potter and the lexicon of doom

In a three day trial in April 2008, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York considered whether the Harry Potter Lexicon infringed the intellectual property rights of J.K. Rowling and Warner Brothers. The case has attracted great media attention. As John Crace, a reporter for The Guardian, observed: “On one side: global-celebrity author J.K. Rowling. On the other: an amateur fan site devoted to the world's favourite boy wizard. At stake: the soul of Harry Potter.” J.K. Rowling is the author of the seven book Harry Potter series, which tell the story of a young wizard, Harry Potter, and his battles with Voldemort, the Lord of Darkness. As the court papers noted, “The Harry Potter Books are a modern day publishing phenomenon and success story.” Warner Brothers sought and obtained the film rights to the series. The entertainment company has thus far produced five films; a sixth is due in November 2008; and the final instalment is planned. The Harry Potter Lexicon is a reference guide created by Steven Vander Ark, a former grade school teacher. He has organised a large volume of material on the Harry Potter books and the Harry Potter films on a website in an alphabetical listing, from “A-Z”. The founder of RDR Books, Roger Rapoport, approached Ark to publish the Harry Potter Lexicon in a book form. Ark agreed to this request, and provided the publisher with a condensed version of the web-site. After RDR Books announced its intention to publish the reference book, J.K. Rowling and Warner Brothers brought a legal action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging that the publishers of the Harry Potter Lexicon were in breach of various intellectual property rights. A spokesperson for Warner Brothers and J.K. Rowling observed: "A fan’s affectionate enthusiasm should not obscure acts of plagiarism. The publishers knew what they were doing. The problem remains that the Lexicon takes an enormous amount of Ms. Rowling’s work and adds virtually no original commentary of its own. As we’ve said in court, it takes too much and adds too little. Authors have a duty to prevent the exploitation of their works by people who contribute nothing original, creative or interpretive." The litigation involves the intersection of copyright law, trade mark law, and consumer protection law. It has a wider significance because it deals with the protection of authorial rights; the use of literary indexes, supplements and reference guides; and the clash between character merchandising and fan fiction.

Remixing Canadian copyright law: A review essay on'An Emerging Intellectual Property Paradigm','Canadian Copyright: A Citizen's Guide'; and'RiP!: A Remix Manifesto', Prometheus, Vol. 27 (3), p. 297-305

In her album, Hymns of the 49th Parallel, the chanteuse K.D. Lang pays tribute to a series of great Canadian songwriters—such as Neil Young, Leonard Cohen, Joni Mitchell and Jane Siberry. In a similar spirit of celebration, this review essay pays homage to a number of recent texts and films dealing with Canadian intellectual property. First, it considers Ysolde Gendreau’s collection, An Emerging Intellectual Property Paradigm: Perspectives from Canada. Second, this essay looks at Laura Murray and Samuel Trosow’s manual, Canadian Copyright: A Citizen’s Guide. Finally, this review evaluates Brett Gaylor’s documentary, RiP! A Remix Manifesto. The three works share certain affinities—a spirit of scepticism about the legitimacy and the efficacy of existing networks of law, policy and bureaucracy; a populist interest in the impact of intellectual property on the everyday lives of citizens, creators and consumers; a passion for human rights; and a melioristic desire for sensible law reform of copyright law and related regimes of intellectual property.

The Sorcerer II expedition: Intellectual property and biodiscovery

This article considers the significance of a leading marine biodiscovery initiative. In March 2004, Dr. J. Craig Venter announced the official launch of the Sorcerer II Expedition, a scientific expedition of discovery, which would survey marine and terrestrial microbial populations. The Expedition has the potential to uncover tens of thousands of new microbial species and tens of millions of new genes. Venter has disavowed that the Sorcerer II Expedition has any commercial ambitions. However, some have viewed the Sorcerer II Expedition with suspicion. Various civil society groups have accused the Expedition of engaging in 'biopiracy'. This article investigates the Convention on Biological Diversity 1992 and other relevant international treaties, various national and regional regimes to govern access to genetic resources, and benefit-sharing agreements. It considers the intersection of intellectual property law, contract law, environmental law, and international law in this field. This article provides a blueprint for a nationally consistent scheme for access to genetic resources, and a model for future international developments.

Wikipedia, collective authorship, and the politics of knowledge

This chapter considers the legal ramifications of Wikipedia, and other online media, such as the Encyclopedia of Life. Nathaniel Tkacz (2007) has observed: 'Wikipedia is an ideal entry-point from which to approach the shifting character of knowledge in contemporary society.' He observes: 'Scholarship on Wikipedia from computer science, history, philosophy, pedagogy and media studies has moved beyond speculation regarding its considerable potential, to the task of interpreting - and potentially intervening in - the significance of Wikipedia's impact' (Tkacz 2007). After an introduction, Part II considers the evolution and development of Wikipedia, and the legal troubles that have attended it. It also considers the establishment of rival online encyclopedia - such as Citizendium set up by Larry Sanger, the co-founder of Wikipedia; and Knol, the mysterious new project of Google. Part III explores the use of mass, collaborative authorship in the field of science. In particular, it looks at the development of the Encyclopedia of Life, which seeks to document the world's biodiversity. This chapter expresses concern that Wiki-based software had to develop in a largely hostile and inimical legal environment. It contends that copyright law and related fields of intellectual property need to be reformed in order better to accommodate users of copyright material (Rimmer 2007). This chapter makes a number of recommendations. First, there is a need to acknowledge and recognize forms of mass, collaborative production and consumption - not just individual authorship. Second, the view of a copyright 'work' and other subject matter as a complete and closed piece of cultural production also should be reconceptualised. Third, the defense of fair use should be expanded to accommodate a wide range of amateur, peer-to-peer production activities - not only in the United States, but in other jurisdictions as well. Fourth, the safe harbor protections accorded to Internet intermediaries, such as Wikipedia, should be strengthened. Fifth, there should be a defense in respect of the use of 'orphan works' - especially in cases of large-scale digitization. Sixth, the innovations of open source licensing should be expressly incorporated and entrenched within the formal framework of copyright laws. Finally, courts should craft judicial remedies to take into account concerns about political censorship and freedom of speech.

Climate justice for intellectual property at Durban

DURBAN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE: In a global day of action for climate justice, thousands of protestors complained about the slow progress in international debates on climate change at the United Nations conference in Durban. One of the chants of the campaigners was “Climate justice … not climate apartheid”. Banners dubbed the Durban event a “circus” – a “conference of polluters”.

The Doha deadlock: Intellectual property and climate change

In November 2001, Doha hosted trade talks over intellectual property and public health. The discussions resulted in the landmark Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health. The Doha Declaration recognised “that the TRIPS Agreement does not and should not prevent members from taking measures to protect public health” - particularly in relation to HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and other epidemics.

A Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 (# ACTA)

“If Hollywood could order intellectual property laws for Christmas, what would they look like? This is pretty close.” David Fewer “While European and American IP maximalists have pushed for TRIPS-Plus provisions in FTAs and bilateral agreements, they are now pushing for TRIPS-Plus-Plus protections in these various forums.” Susan Sell “ACTA is a threat to the future of a free and open Internet.” Alexander Furnas “Implementing the agreement could open a Pandora's box of potential human rights violations.” Amnesty International. “I will not take part in this masquerade.” Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European Parliament Executive Summary As an independent scholar and expert in intellectual property, I am of the view that the Australian Parliament should reject the adoption of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. I would take issue with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s rather partisan account of the negotiations, the consultations, and the outcomes associated with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. In my view, the negotiations were secretive and biased; the local consultations were sometimes farcical because of the lack of information about the draft texts of the agreement; and the final text of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 is not in the best interests of Australia, particularly given that it is a net importer of copyright works and trade mark goods and services. I would also express grave reservations about the quality of the rather pitiful National Interest Analysis – and the lack of any regulatory impact statement – associated with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. The assertion that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 does not require legislative measures is questionable – especially given the United States Trade Representative has called the agreement ‘the highest-standard plurilateral agreement ever achieved concerning the enforcement of intellectual property rights.’ It is worthwhile reiterating that there has been much criticism of the secretive and partisan nature of the negotiations surrounding the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. Sean Flynn summarizes these concerns: "The negotiation process for ACTA has been a case study in establishing the conditions for effective industry capture of a lawmaking process. Instead of using the relatively transparent and inclusive multilateral processes, ACTA was launched through a closed and secretive “‘club approach’ in which like-minded jurisdictions define enforcement ‘membership’ rules and then invite other countries to join, presumably via other trade agreements.” The most influential developing countries, including Brazil, India, China and Russia, were excluded. Likewise, a series of manoeuvres ensured that public knowledge about the specifics of the agreement and opportunities for input into the process were severely limited. Negotiations were held with mere hours notice to the public as to when and where they would be convened, often in countries half away around the world from where public interest groups are housed. Once there, all negotiation processes were closed to the public. Draft texts were not released before or after most negotiating rounds, and meetings with stakeholders took place only behind closed doors and off the record. A public release of draft text, in April 2010, was followed by no public or on-the-record meetings with negotiators." Moreover, it is disturbing that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 has been driven by ideology and faith, rather than by any evidence-based policy making Professor Duncan Matthews has raised significant questions about the quality of empirical evidence used to support the proposal of Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011: ‘There are concerns that statements about levels of counterfeiting and piracy are based either on customs seizures, with the actual quantities of infringing goods in free circulation in any particular market largely unknown, or on estimated losses derived from industry surveys.’ It is particularly disturbing that, in spite of past criticism, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has supported the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011, without engaging the Productivity Commission or the Treasury to do a proper economic analysis of the proposed treaty. Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European Parliament, quit his position, and said of the process: "I want to denounce in the strongest possible manner the entire process that led to the signature of this agreement: no inclusion of civil society organisations, a lack of transparency from the start of the negotiations, repeated postponing of the signature of the text without an explanation being ever given, exclusion of the EU Parliament's demands that were expressed on several occasions in our assembly. As rapporteur of this text, I have faced never-before-seen manoeuvres from the right wing of this Parliament to impose a rushed calendar before public opinion could be alerted, thus depriving the Parliament of its right to expression and of the tools at its disposal to convey citizens' legitimate demands.” Everyone knows the ACTA agreement is problematic, whether it is its impact on civil liberties, the way it makes Internet access providers liable, its consequences on generic drugs manufacturing, or how little protection it gives to our geographical indications. This agreement might have major consequences on citizens' lives, and still, everything is being done to prevent the European Parliament from having its say in this matter. That is why today, as I release this report for which I was in charge, I want to send a strong signal and alert the public opinion about this unacceptable situation. I will not take part in this masquerade." There have been parallel concerns about the process and substance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the context of Australia. I have a number of concerns about the substance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. First, I am concerned that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 fails to provide appropriate safeguards in respect of human rights, consumer protection, competition, and privacy laws. It is recommended that the new Joint Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights investigate this treaty. Second, I argue that there is a lack of balance to the copyright measures in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 – the definition of piracy is overbroad; the suite of civil remedies, criminal offences, and border measures is excessive; and there is a lack of suitable protection for copyright exceptions, limitations, and remedies. Third, I discuss trade mark law, intermediary liability, and counterfeiting. I express my concerns, in this context, that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 could have an adverse impact upon consumer interests, competition policy, and innovation in the digital economy. I also note, with concern, the lobbying by tobacco industries for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 – and the lack of any recognition in the treaty for the capacity of countries to take measures of tobacco control under the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Fourth, I note that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 provides no positive obligations to promote access to essential medicines. It is particularly lamentable that Australia and the United States of America have failed to implement the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health 2001 and the WTO General Council Decision 2003. Fifth, I express concerns about the border measures in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. Such measures lack balance – and unduly favour the interests of intellectual property owners over consumers, importers, and exporters. Moreover, such measures will be costly, as they involve shifting the burden of intellectual property enforcement to customs and border authorities. Interdicting, seizing, and destroying goods may also raise significant trade issues. Finally, I express concern that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 undermines the role of existing international organisations, such as the United Nations, the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization, and subverts international initiatives such as the WIPO Development Agenda 2007. I also question the raison d'être, independence, transparency, and accountability of the proposed new ‘ACTA Committee’. In this context, I am concerned by the shift in the position of the Labor Party in its approach to international treaty-making in relation to intellectual property. The Australian Parliament adopted the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, which included a large Chapter on intellectual property. The treaty was a ‘TRIPs-Plus’ agreement, because the obligations were much more extensive and prescriptive than those required under the multilateral framework established by the TRIPS Agreement 1994. During the debate over the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, the Labor Party expressed the view that it would seek to mitigate the effects of the TRIPS-Plus Agreement, when at such time it gained power. Far from seeking to ameliorate the effects of the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, the Labor Government would seek to lock Australia into a TRIPS-Double Plus Agreement – the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. There has not been a clear political explanation for this change in approach to international intellectual property. For both reasons of process and substance, I conclude that the Australian Parliament and the Australian Government should reject the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. The Australian Government would do better to endorse the Washington Declaration on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest 2011, and implement its outstanding obligations in respect of access to knowledge, access to essential medicines, and the WIPO Development Agenda 2007. The case study of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 highlights the need for further reforms to the process by which Australia engages in international treaty-making.

Framework for assessing the influence of critical infrastructure interdependencies in post-disaster reconstruction management

Due to ever increasing climate instability, the number of natural disasters affecting society and communities is expected to increase globally in the future, which will result in a growing number of casualties and damage to property and infrastructure. Such damage poses crucial challenges for recovery of interdependent critical infrastructures. Post-disaster reconstruction is a complex undertaking as it is not only closely linked to the well-being and essential functioning of society, but also requires a large financial commitment. Management of critical infrastructure during post-disaster recovery needs to be underpinned by a holistic recognition that the recovery of each individual infrastructure system (e.g. energy, water, transport and information and communication technology) can be affected by the interdependencies that exist between these different systems. A fundamental characteristic of these interdependencies is that failure of one critical infrastructure system can result in the failure of other interdependent infrastructures, leading to a cascade of failures, which can impede post-disaster recovery and delay the subsequent reconstruction process. Consequently, there is a critical need for developing a holistic strategy to assess the influence of infrastructure interdependencies, and for incorporating these interdependencies into a post-disaster recovery strategy. This paper discusses four key dimensions of interdependencies that need to be considered in a post-disaster reconstruction planning. Using key concepts and sub-concepts derived from the notion of interdependency, the paper examines how critical infrastructure interdependencies affect the recovery processes of damaged infrastructures.