Dozier Internet Law believes that businesses have a right to legal protections on the web. The web is the technology child of Virginia, but its initial commercialization and mass appeal can be attributed to the folks in San Francisco and Northern California. Naturally, some of the liberal, anti-business philosophies of the Bay Area took hold as the guidance for establishing the rules of the web. Business interests were rarely contributing to the dialogue early on. Laws were passed, and policies established, that created and then protected "individual rights", but in an unbalanced way. Businesses were not offered a seat at the table, and one sided policies, practices, procedures and laws evolved. Immunity was legislatively granted to those that would be liable for copyright infringement, defamation, and much more. When the history of the web is written, this "time of lawlessness" shielded by disingenuous claims of legitimacy will certainly have a prominent place.
But times are changing. At Dozier Internet Law, we believe that companies should be able to protect their intellectual property, not have it stolen by websites and consumers through "free" downloads of music, software, and films. At Dozier Internet Law, we believe that business trade secrets should be protected, and that the scofflaws of the web should not be permitted to trample the reputation of a business. At Dozier Internet Law, we believe that the thieves of the web should be pursued civilly and, when appropriate, prosecuted criminally. It's as simple as that. And, fortunately, all around the world, court decisions are moving in the direction of returning commerce, albeit e-commerce, to a rational marketplace that respects the rights of businesses. A return to status quo, and away from the stranglehold of expansive liberal concepts of "public participation" and free speech, is under way. The ACLU, EFF, and Ralph Nader founded "Public Citizen" are all losing leverage, losing bargaining position, and losing their wars on business.
In China, an appeals court recently held that linking to copyright infringing material creates liability. Yet, how often have we heard "Public Citizen" tell its constituents that they can link to anything, at anytime, and ignore the property rights of website business owners?
Apple's trade secrets were allegedly published by a website, and a California court is on the verge of entering an order shutting the website down. Consumer protection interests defended those responsible for the theft.
The NCAA has just approved new rules for bloggers...limiting their ability to report live from athletic events because the NCAA owns certain rights to the airing of their events, in the face of opposition from a broad array of "free speech" expansionists.
A court in California recently stripped a website of its immunity granted by federal law, rejecting the consumer protection stance and assuming a pro-business perspective.
And so it goes. The pendulum is swinging. Swinging back from an apogee of liberalism and expansive notions of free speech and towards a fulcrum of normalcy. Swinging back to a level playing field in which the pre-Internet property rights of businesses are returned to businesses. But this process is just beginning to play out here in the US and all around the world. And the tools of aggression will once again be wielded by the Ralph Nader founded "Public Citizen" and its many constituents and followers. "Free speech" liberals are all about protecting free speech...unless they don't agree with it.