
<?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/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: TPW 16: Wireless Carterfone, Korean Copyright Deal, and Broadcast Decency</title>
	<atom:link href="http://techliberation.com/2007/06/08/tpw-16-wireless-carterfone-korean-copyright-deal-and-broadcast-decency/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://techliberation.com/2007/06/08/tpw-16-wireless-carterfone-korean-copyright-deal-and-broadcast-decency/</link>
	<description>Keeping politicians&#039; hands off the Net &#38; everything else related to technology</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 17:40:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Coseven</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2007/06/08/tpw-16-wireless-carterfone-korean-copyright-deal-and-broadcast-decency/comment-page-1/#comment-45477</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Coseven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Jun 2007 02:12:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2007/06/08/tpw-16-wireless-carterfone-korean-copyright-deal-and-broadcast-decency/#comment-45477</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Good discourse on wireless.  The CTIA is chartered to independently certify standard devices.  Open attachment can be enforced, if America wants it.  There is a worldwide problem with blocking (or charging extra for) certain features on mobile networks.  I don&#039;t understand why Tim Wu needs to position it as a unique US innovation problem.  South Korea is probably the most open and Japan/Italy are the most closed.  The US is closer to South Korea than Italy.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good discourse on wireless.  The CTIA is chartered to independently certify standard devices.  Open attachment can be enforced, if America wants it.  There is a worldwide problem with blocking (or charging extra for) certain features on mobile networks.  I don&#8217;t understand why Tim Wu needs to position it as a unique US innovation problem.  South Korea is probably the most open and Japan/Italy are the most closed.  The US is closer to South Korea than Italy.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Coseven</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2007/06/08/tpw-16-wireless-carterfone-korean-copyright-deal-and-broadcast-decency/comment-page-1/#comment-38537</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Coseven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Jun 2007 01:12:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2007/06/08/tpw-16-wireless-carterfone-korean-copyright-deal-and-broadcast-decency/#comment-38537</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Good discourse on wireless.  The CTIA is chartered to independently certify standard devices.  Open attachment can be enforced, if America wants it.  There is a worldwide problem with blocking (or charging extra for) certain features on mobile networks.  I don&#039;t understand why Tim Wu needs to position it as a unique US innovation problem.  South Korea is probably the most open and Japan/Italy are the most closed.  The US is closer to South Korea than Italy.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good discourse on wireless.  The CTIA is chartered to independently certify standard devices.  Open attachment can be enforced, if America wants it.  There is a worldwide problem with blocking (or charging extra for) certain features on mobile networks.  I don&#8217;t understand why Tim Wu needs to position it as a unique US innovation problem.  South Korea is probably the most open and Japan/Italy are the most closed.  The US is closer to South Korea than Italy.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

