Thesis (Ph. D.)--Carnegie Mellon University, 1990. / October, 1990. Order number 9126972. Bibliographical references: p. 135-140.

Thesis (M. S.)--Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, 2008. / Committee Chair: Dr. Lee, Hsien-Hsin S.; Committee Member: Dr. Lim, Sung-Kyu; Committee Member: Dr. Yalamanchili, Sudhakar.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of California, San Diego, 2006. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 252-269).

Thesis (M.A.)--York University, 2004. Graduate Programme in Communications and Culture. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 99-105). Also available on the Internet. MODE OF ACCESS via web browser by entering the following URL: http://wwwlib.umi.com/cr/yorku/fullcit?pMQ99398

Thesis (Ph. D. in Philosophy)--Vanderbilt University, Aug. 2006. / Title from title screen. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Florida State University, 2006. / Advisor: John Fenstermaker, Florida State University, College of Arts and Sciences, Dept. of English. Title and description from dissertation home page (viewed Sept. 18, 2006). Document formatted into pages; contains vi, 144 pages. Includes bibliographical references.

In this paper, we discuss a wireless grid in which users are highly mobile, and form ad-hoc and sometimes short-lived connections with other devices. As they roam through networks, the users may choose to employ privacy-enhancing technologies to address their privacy needs and benefit from the computational power of the grid for a variety of tasks, including sharing content. The high rate of mobility of the users on the wireless grid, when combined with privacy enhancing mechanisms and ad-hoc connections, makes it difficult to conclusively link devices and/or individuals with network activities and to hold them liable for particular downloads. Protecting intellectual property in this scenario requires a solution that can work in absence of knowledge about behavior of particular individuals. Building on previous work, we argue for a solution that ensures proper compensation to content owners without inhibiting use and dissemination of works. Our proposal is based on digital tracking for measuring distribution volume of content and compensation of authors based on this accounting information. The emphasis is on obtaining good estimates of rate of popularity of works, without keeping track of activities of individuals or devices. The contribution of this paper is a revenue protection mechanism, Distribution Volume Tracking, that does not invade the privacy of users in the wireless grid and works even in the presence of privacy-enhancing technologies they may employ.

- / -

A Universidade é notoriamente reconhecida como fonte de geração e disseminação de conhecimentos. A inovação, por sua vez, decorre de conhecimento científico, que por meio de instrumentos de propriedade intelectual, como a patente, pode ser protegido, o que garante os direitos dos atores envolvidos quanto à apropriação indevida do conhecimento, possibilita o compartilhamento seguro e, por fim, contribui para o desenvolvimento tecnológico. Com essa abordagem, o presente estudo procurou analisar os recursos que a Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL) disponibiliza aos pesquisadores para a proteção do conhecimento visando ao surgimento de inovações no meio acadêmico. Para alcançar esse objetivo, foi desenvolvida uma pesquisa descritiva de caráter qualitativo por meio do estudo de caso envolvendo gestores da AINTEC e pesquisadores que solicitaram patentes no período de 2008 a 2010. A coleta de dados foi realizada em duas etapas. Na primeira, por meio da pesquisa documental, foi analisada a resolução que contém as diretrizes em relação à proteção do conhecimento e o currículo da Plataforma Lattes de todos os participantes, com vistas a identificar o perfil dos mesmos, produção científica e número de solicitações de patentes. A segunda etapa possibilitou, por meio de entrevistas, conhecer a Agência de Inovação Tecnológica da UEL (AINTEC), enquanto recurso indispensável para a proteção do conhecimento. Para tanto, foram investigados aspectos referentes à infraestrutura da agência, apoio e suporte dado aos inventores. Ainda nessa etapa, foram reunidas considerações dos pesquisadores sobre a atuação da AINTEC, a sensibilização para a proteção do conhecimento, os mecanismos mais utilizados para disseminação de uma nova tecnologia e as dificuldades encontradas pelo pesquisador no processo de patenteamento. Os resultados demonstram que os pesquisadores, apesar de estarem atuando há muito tempo na instituição, não estão sensibilizados para a proteção do conhecimento, priorizando o artigo como veículo de divulgação científica. O processo de patenteamento é visto como algo complexo, burocrático e moroso. A AINTEC, por falta de pessoas preparadas para a função, não consegue desempenhar suas atividades a contento. As diretrizes de proteção do conhecimento existentes estão voltadas essencialmente para a participação dos inventores nos ganhos financeiros. Com esses resultados foi possível identificar um cenário não muito favorável ao surgimento de inovações, considerando, para isso, a escassez de mão de obra; escassez de recursos para a realização de pesquisas de cunho inovador; falta de equipamentos de última geração; e aspectos da cultura vigente no meio acadêmico, como o ato contínuo do compartilhamento livre de ideias e conhecimentos e a falta de conhecimento do pesquisador sobre os benefícios da proteção do conhecimento. Talvez, por essas razões, a transformação do conhecimento em produtos palpáveis que beneficiem a sociedade ainda não é ação comum da comunidade científica da UEL. Um longo caminho deve ser percorrido ainda para que a inovação seja intensificada no meio acadêmico e a universidade tenha participação efetiva no processo inovativo. / University is notoriously recognized as a source of generation and dissemination of knowledge. Innovation derives from scientific knowledge, which in turns, through instruments of intellectual property such as patents, can be protected assuring the rights of the involved agents concerning to misappropriation of knowledge. Therefore, those instruments allow secure sharing, and eventually contribute to technological development. By this approach, the present study aimed at analyzing the resources the State University of Londrina (UEL) provides to researchers in terms of knowledge protection having the rise of innovations in the academic environment as objective. To achieve this goal, we developed a descriptive qualitative research through case study involving AINTEC managers and researchers who have applied patents in the period from 2008 to 2010. Data collection was performed in two stages. At first, through documentary research, we analyzed the resolution containing guidelines regarding protection of knowledge and the curriculum of Lattes platform for all participants in order to identify their profiles, their scientific production and the number of patent requests. The second stage allowed through interviews to come to know UEL Technological Innovation Agency (AINTEC), indispensable resource at knowledge protection. Thus, aspects related to the infrastructure of the agency were investigated along with the help and support that the inventors are given. Also at this stage, accounts from the researchers about the AINTEC performance, the awareness for the protection of knowledge, the most used mechanisms for the dissemination of a new technology and the difficulties found by the researcher in the process of patenting were gathered. Although the researchers have been working for long at the institution, the outcomes show that they are not aware of the knowledge protection in putting the article as primary importance as a mean of scientific promotion. The patenting process is thought as something complex, bureaucratic and slow. AINTEC cannot carry out its activities properly because of lack of trained personnel. The existing knowledge protection guidelines are mainly aimed at the inventor’s participation in the profits. With these results, it was possible to identify a scenario not very favorable to the rise of innovations considering the lack of labor, lack of resources in order to carry out research of innovative nature, lack of state-of-art equipment, aspects of culture in force in academic environment such as the continuous act of free sharing of ideas and knowledge, and the researcher’s lack of understanding on the benefits of knowledge protection. Perhaps for those reasons, bringing the knowledge to fruition, which benefits the society, has not been common action at UEL scientific community yet. There is still a long way to run for the innovation to be intensified in the academic environment and for university to have an effective participation in the innovative process.

Digital sampling, wherein excerpts from pre-existing recordings are incorporated into a new recording, has been a vibrant and innovative manner of artistic creation since the 1960s. However, this practice has engendered complex infringement litigation, blurring the commonly understood lines that separate the musical "composition" from the "recording." The has been exacerbated by conflicting articulations as to the status of these entities as "works" within musicological discourse and conceptions of copyright law such that they would warrant protection from infringement. Furthermore, sampling has complicated the application of previously utilized principles of copyright law, such as de minimis and substantial similarity, and has not occasioned much, if any, consideration in litigation as to the artistic or creative purposes for which samples were used. This thesis considers Grand Upright Music Limited v. Warner Brothers Records, Inc., the first notable case involving digital sampling. The first two chapters offer an historical overview of the development of American copyright law and its musical purview, and proceeds to the facts and ultimate judicial ruling in this case. Through the interpretive lens of "democratic experimentalism," the remainder of the thesis proposes an alternative method for handling digital sampling cases than that of the Grand Upright court and other courts in subsequent cases. This is offered with a view to taking a more comprehensive account of the materially quantitative and artistically qualitative aspects of particular acts of sampling.