ArsTechnica.com: Culture and copyright are on a collision course as the Internet makes it much easier to share media with friends and family but also increases the chances that such a transaction is "breaking the law." Julian Sanchez visits this timely topic in his recent Law & Disorder article, A few thoughts on copyright and culture, and posits that there needs to be a new re-working of the concepts and legal ramifications associated with casual copying for social reasons. Sanchez writes, "Suppose, just for the sake of argument, that the nightmare scenarios of the MPAA are all dead on: Absent draconian action, online movie piracy will run rampant, no better business model for the film industry will emerge, and big-budget, mass-market blockbusters will become economically infeasible to produce, because studios will have no prospects of recouping such massive investments. The amount of new movie content of this type is reduced, though what does exist is more widely available to large numbers of people at low (or no) cost." Would this be a bad thing? Content is available to more consumers at a lower cost and the possible profits go up due to simple economic mathematics. Or...?

"Is there anybody out there?" to borrow a lyric from Pink Floyd. Anyone at all?

MIT: For a fascinating read on the "Aha!" phenomenon and how insights play out in the brain at an electrical level, be sure to read The Eureka Hunt (*.pdf link), by Jonah Lehrer from the New Yorker magazine. Why is this process important to the small business owner? Because many times, innovations do not come from plodding analysis or dogged research, but rather by some slippery machinations of the "wetware" of the mind and by understanding these pivotal moments, ideas and creativity can be more easily accessed to create new and useful methods of pursuing goals. That's why! In addition, this particular article also features some real-life examples of unexpected insight in action that help liven up the somewhat dry, scientific feel that the pervades the piece.

BusinessWeek.com: The election of Barack Obama as the next President of the US has many people excited at the prospect of change and possibility, and small business owners number among those hopefuls. Gene Marks, CPA and owner of the Marks Group, takes a moment to point out the impacts of a Obama's new plan for taxes. Marks writes on taking the prudent route to continuing business success, "Smart business owners will recognize as much income as possible this year before potential new tax laws take effect. That means, depending whether you're on cash or accrual basis, getting as many invoices legally out the door and/or as much cash in the door as you can. These savvy business owners will also be finding ways to distribute income over the next few years. Think paying family members at lower rates, bartering, deferring income, and shifting profits overseas. Smart business owners will be lined up outside their accountant's door already, planning these strategies for 2009 and beyond." For the rest of Marks' thoughts on being tax savvy in the coming new year, read How Entrepreneurs Can Profit with Obama.

Locus Magazine: Cory Doctorow has a wonderful read on the copyright vs. culture debate in a recent piece, Why I Copyfight. Doctorow points out that the Internet is an inherent copyright infringing technology and that if copying is a crime, then the the whole 21st century model of technological sharing and the democratization of information is a limitless source of criminal activity, intentional or otherwise. But should cyber-chatting around the virtual watercooler be a crime? "Copyright law valorizes copying as a rare and noteworthy event. On the Internet, copying is automatic, massive, instantaneous, free, and constant. Clip a Dilbert cartoon and stick it on your office door and you're not violating copyright. Take a picture of your office door and put it on your homepage so that the same co-workers can see it, and you've violated copyright law, and since copyright law treats copying as such a rarified activity, it assesses penalties that run to the hundreds of thousands of dollars for each act of infringement." Is this reasonable? Would the moron-in-a-hurry think it was a crime to take a picture of a newspaper clipping and post it on your online bulletin board? Food for thought.