More Dave Winer
Dan Bricklin reiterates the argument that casts copyright infringement as malum prohibitum rather than malum in se. (I've argued that; it still seems to be the biggest issue which divides people with regard to copyright.)
Bricklin is also proliferating examples to show that there's some arbitrariness in the scope of copyright's coverage; it's not a clean and obvious thing dictated by some simple principle. Actually, it turns out that it's the result of political struggle and negotiation, and without much public scrutiny.
