1997 Mark Stefik.

Principal Scientist, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center Park, Palo Alto, California; Ph.D., 1980, Stanford University; B.S., 1970, Stanford University.

ark Stefik.

Principal Scientist, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center Park, Palo Alto, California; Ph.D., 1980, Stanford University; B.S., 1970, Stanford University.

1. John P. Barlow, The Economy of Ideas: Rethinking Patents and Copyrights in the Digital Age, WIRED, March 1994, at 84, 129.

2. GEOFFREY A. MOORE, CROSSING THE CHASM: MARKETING AND SELLING HIGH-TECH PRODUCTS TO MAINSTREAM CUSTOMERS (1995).

3. GEOFFREY A. MOORE, INSIDE THE TORNADO (1995).

4. See generally BRUCE SCHNEIER, APPLIED CRYPTOGRAPHY: PROTOCOLS, ALGORITHMS, AND SOURCE CODE IN C (2nd ed. 1995).

5. See, e.g., Cross Industry Working Team, Electronic Cash, Tokens and Payments in the National Information Infrastructure (describing an electronic cash payment system), available at (visted May 9, 1997) <http://www.xiwt.org:3000/XIWT/documents/dig_cash_doc/ ElecCashToC.html>.

6. See, e.g., Jack T. Brassil et al., Electronic Marking and Identification Techniques to Discourage Document Copying, 13 IEEE J. ON SELECTED AREAS COMM. 1495 (1995), (technique for embedding hidden watermark within text documents); INGEMAR J. COX ET AL., SECURE SPREAD SPECTRUM WATERMARKING FOR MULTIMEDIA (1995) (NEC Research Institute Technical Report 95-10) (technique for embedding hidden watermark within audio and image data).

7. See, e.g., MAI Systems Corp. v. Peak Computer, Inc., 991 F.2d 511, 517-18 (9th Cir. 1993), cert. dismissed, 510 U.S. 1033 (1994) (loading software into RAM causes a "fixed" copy to be made).

8. "The test of reproduction, as the software courts [sic] have suggested, should be simply usefulness to the reproducer." Ira L. Brandriss, Writing in Frost on a Window Pane: E-mail and Chatting on RAM and Copyright Fixation, 43 J. COPYRIGHT SOC'Y U.S.A. 237, 275-76 (1996).

9. 17 U.S.C. 109(a) (1994).

10. 17 U.S.C. 107 (1994). In codifying the fair use doctrine, Congress has recognized that certain otherwise-infringing uses of a copyrighted work may be excused based on equitable factors. Courts have developed a four-factor test to determine whether a use is "fair." See, e.g., Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 114 S. Ct. 1164 (1994).

11. Some scholars have suggested that a use should not be considered "fair" if the use could have been purchased through the market. See, e.g., Wendy J. Gordon, Fair Use as Market Failure: A Structural and Economic Analysis of the Betamax Case and its Predecessors, 82 COLUM. L. REV. 1600, 1609 ("A court generally should engage in balancing costs and benefits only if market failure has left it the only institution able to do so. ").

12. See generally MARK STEFIK, INTERNET DREAMS: ARCHETYPES, MYTHS, AND METAPHORS, 1-107 (1996).

13. It is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to copy it provided that the new copy is for archival purposes only. 17 U.S.C. 117(2) (1994).

14. The subject of a photograph may have a tort action against unauthorized uses of his or her likeness, especially if the use is commercial, under right of publicity or right of privacy theories. See generally MARTIN P. HOFFMAN, THE RIGHTS OF PUBLICITY AND PRIVACY, SA71 ALI-ABA 209, 213 (1996).

15. See, e.g., E. Scott Johnson, Protecting Distinctive Sounds: The Challenge of Digital Sampling, 2 J.L. & TECH. 273, 274 (1987) (raising the issue in the context of digital sampling of music).

16. "[T]he fair use of a copyrighted work . . . for purposes such as criticism, comment . . . scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright." 17 U.S.C. 107 (1994).

17. 17 U.S.C.S. 302(a) (Law. Co-op., LEXIS through 11/12/96).

18. 17 U.S.C. 302(b) (1996).

19. 17 U.S.C. 302(c) (1996).

20. Id.

21. For example, strong encryption software falls within Category XIII(b) of the United States Munitions List, and export out of the United States is prohibited by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). 22 C.F.R. 121.1 (Michie, LEXIS through 4/18/97).

22. For example, the European Commonwealth has enacted local content requirements for television broadcasts whereby "member States shall ensure where practicable and by appropriate means, that broadcasters reserve for European works . . . a majority proportion of their transmission time, excluding the time appointed to news, sports events, games, advertising and teletext services." John D. Donaldson, Television Without Frontiers: The Continuing Tension Between Liberal Free Trade and European Cultural Integrity, 20 FORDHAM INT'L L.J. 90, 99 (1996).

23. The Communications Decency Act of 1996 provides that cable "distributor[s] shall limit the access of children to . . . sexually explicit adult programming . . . by not providing such programming during the hours when a significant number of children are likely to view it" unless the programming is fully blocked or scrambled. 47 U.S.C.A. 561 (West, WESTLAW through 11/12/96).

24. See Pamela Samuelson, Regulation of Technologies to Protect Copyrighted Works, COMM. ACM, July 1996, at 17, 17.