<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: IP Professors Amicus Brief in 20th Century Fox v. Cablevision</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2007/06/11/ip-professors-amicus-brief-in-20th-century-fox-v-cablevision/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2007/06/11/ip-professors-amicus-brief-in-20th-century-fox-v-cablevision/</link>
	<description>Information, Law, and the Law of Information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 20:34:24 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Info/Law &#187; Supreme Court Leaves Info/Law Alone</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2007/06/11/ip-professors-amicus-brief-in-20th-century-fox-v-cablevision/comment-page-1/#comment-91321</link>
		<dc:creator>Info/Law &#187; Supreme Court Leaves Info/Law Alone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 18:07:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2007/06/11/ip-professors-amicus-brief-in-20th-ce#comment-91321</guid>
		<description>[...] second decision is close to my co-blogger Tim&#8217;s heart, as he has described before. The Supreme Court refused to review the Second Circuit&#8217;s opinion finding that [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] second decision is close to my co-blogger Tim&#8217;s heart, as he has described before. The Supreme Court refused to review the Second Circuit&#8217;s opinion finding that [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Info/Law &#187; 2nd Circuit: A Copy that Exists for 1 Second is No &#8220;Copy&#8221; at All</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2007/06/11/ip-professors-amicus-brief-in-20th-century-fox-v-cablevision/comment-page-1/#comment-61229</link>
		<dc:creator>Info/Law &#187; 2nd Circuit: A Copy that Exists for 1 Second is No &#8220;Copy&#8221; at All</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2008 00:53:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2007/06/11/ip-professors-amicus-brief-in-20th-ce#comment-61229</guid>
		<description>[...] for the case formerly known as 20th Century Fox v. Cablevision. As readers of this blog might recall, I joined an amicus brief in the case, limited to the question whether the lower court expanded the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] for the case formerly known as 20th Century Fox v. Cablevision. As readers of this blog might recall, I joined an amicus brief in the case, limited to the question whether the lower court expanded the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Patry</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2007/06/11/ip-professors-amicus-brief-in-20th-century-fox-v-cablevision/comment-page-1/#comment-13634</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Patry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2007 16:34:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2007/06/11/ip-professors-amicus-brief-in-20th-ce#comment-13634</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve read the brief, and it is excellent. Congrats</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve read the brief, and it is excellent. Congrats</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
