Revealed: How copyright law is being misused to remove material from the internet; Guardian, 5/23/16

Alex Hern, Guardian; Revealed: How copyright law is being misused to remove material from the internet:

"Censorship by copyright

The motivation of Ashraf can only be guessed at, but censorship using the DMCA is common online. The act allows web hosts a certain amount of immunity from claims of copyright infringement through what is known as the “safe harbour” rules: in essence, a host isn’t responsible for hosting infringing material provided they didn’t know about it when it went up, and took it down as soon as they were told about it.

In practice, however, this means that web hosts (and the term is broadly interpreted, meaning sites like YouTube, Twitter and Google count) are forced to develop a hair-trigger over claims of copyright infringement, assuming guilt and asking the accused to prove their innocence.

As such, a very easy way to remove something from the internet is to accuse its creator of infringing copyright. Worse, the potential downside of such a false claim is minimal: the accused would have to first file a counterclaim, proving they own the copyright; then file a private lawsuit, and prove material damage; and then track down the offending party to actually recover any monies granted by the court.

That doesn’t happen all that often.

But in recent years, big web companies have started funding lawsuits themselves, to fill the gap in the law and tilt the scales a bit further in favour of content creators wrongly accused."

Do You Love Music? Silicon Valley Doesn’t; New York Times, 5/20/16

Jonathan Taplin, New York Times; Do You Love Music? Silicon Valley Doesn’t:

"Unfortunately, there is a sad history of undervaluing musicians in the United States. Terrestrial radio, a $17 billion industry, pays publishing rights (payments to songwriters) but has never paid artists or record companies for music. In addition, the satellite radio company, SiriusXM, pays below-market royalties, thanks to a giveaway it first wrested from Congress 20 years ago. Conglomerates like iHeartMedia (formerly Clear Channel Communications) and other online services like Pandora, which are required to pay artists for digital streams, have exploited federal copyright law to deny payments for work recorded before 1972 (songwriters are paid; performers are not). This means artists like Aretha Franklin, Ella Fitzgerald, Chuck Berry and John Coltrane never received a dime from AM/FM radio and or from many digital services for some of their greatest music.

The last meaningful legislation in this area was the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in 1998, which was based on the idea that creators should monitor the Internet for illegal copies of their works and give “notice” to websites and services to take pirated material down. Under the act’s “safe harbor” provisions, any service or site that makes a minimal effort to address these notices is immune from liability for piracy or theft."

Landmark study on the effects of copyright takedown abuse on online free expression; BoingBoing.net, 3/30/16

Cory Doctorow, BoingBoing.net; Landmark study on the effects of copyright takedown abuse on online free expression:

"Three of America's sharpest copyright scholars have released a landmark study of the impact of copyright takedowns on free expression in America: Notice and Takedown in Everyday Practice, by Jennifer Urban (UC Berkeley), Joe Karaganis (Columbia), and Brianna L. Schofiel (UC Berkeley) uses detailed surveys and interviews and a random sample from over 100,000,000 takedown notices to analyze the proportion of fraudulent, malformed or otherwise incorrect acts of censorship undertaken in copyright's name, using the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's takedown procedure.

The DMCA is nearly 20 years old, and even before it was passed into law, virtually everyone who was paying attention said that creating a system that allows anything online to be censored through copyright infringement accusations, without due process or even penalties for getting it wrong, would get us into trouble. Now the evidence is in, and it couldn't be more damning."

Sony Music Issues Takedown On Copyright Lecture About Music Copyrights By Harvard Law Professor; TechDirt.com, 2/16/16

Mike Masnick, TechDirt.com; Sony Music Issues Takedown On Copyright Lecture About Music Copyrights By Harvard Law Professor:

"Oh, the irony. First pointed out by Mathias Schindler, it appears that a copyright lecture about music copyright done by famed copyright expert and Harvard Law professor William Fisher has been taken down due to a copyright claim by Sony Music."

4 Key Takeaways From Copyright Reform Committee's Silicon Valley Listening Tour; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), 11/10/15

Parker Higgins, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); 4 Key Takeaways From Copyright Reform Committee's Silicon Valley Listening Tour:

"The House Judiciary Committee, tasked with copyright reform in the Next Great Copyright Act process, has taken its long-running hearing show on the road. This week, members of the committee attended sessions in northern and southern California. The line-up of experts in Santa Clara yesterday was diverse and impressive, and included people like Internet Archive founder Brewster Kahle, noted musician Zoe Keating, iFixit CEO and DMCA activist Kyle Wiens, and of course EFF's own staff attorney Kit Walsh.

Given the wide range of experts, the conversation covered a lot of ground. More than other hearings in this series, though, it got deep into some of the specifics necessary to address shortcomings in current law. Here are four crucial points that got discussed."

Appeals judges hear about Prince’s takedown of “Dancing Baby” YouTube vid; ArsTechnica.com, 7/7/15

Joe Mullin, ArsTechnica.com; Appeals judges hear about Prince’s takedown of “Dancing Baby” YouTube vid:

"A long-running copyright fight between the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Universal Music over fair use in the digital age was considered by an appeals court today, a full eight years after the lawsuit began.

EFF and its client Stephanie Lenz sued Universal Music Group back in 2007, saying that the music giant should have realized Lenz's home video of her son Holden dancing to Prince's "Let's Go Crazy" was clearly fair use. Under EFF's view of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Universal should have to pay damages for a wrongful takedown.

If EFF wins the case, it could have repercussions for how copyright takedowns work online. The group is trying to make Universal pay up under 17 USC 512(f), the section of the DMCA that penalizes copyright owners for wrongful takedowns. Currently, victories under that statute are exceedingly rare and happen only in extreme circumstances."

No more DIY farmer? John Deere copyright battle brings farm equipment ownership in question; Kankakee Daily Journal, 5/30/15

Dennis Moran, Kankakee Daily Journal; No more DIY farmer? John Deere copyright battle brings farm equipment ownership in question:

"Deere & Co. is among major manufacturers engaged in a U.S. Copyright Office battle, one over sophisticated electronic systems.

At issue is access to the software controlling much of the operation of modern cars, trucks and tractors. The software is copyright-protected and, beyond that, locked to prevent hackers and do-it-your-selfers from altering or copying it.

The people and organizations asking the Copyright Office to permit access to the software say it's a matter of fully "owning" the tractor or car you paid for, and that open access would enable consumers to make do-it-yourself repairs without having to go through authorized repair shops with software access codes.

Deere isn't the only company fighting the proposed change — General Motors, the Association of Global Automakers and Eaton Corporation are among the half dozen or so companies and manufacturer associations filing briefs in opposition — but it seems to have become the whipping boy for the opposition with one provocative online story making the rounds.

"We Can't Let John Deere Destroy the Very Idea of Ownership," reads a headline for an opinion piece on Wired, a popular magazine that reports on the culture of emerging technologies."

YouTube’s copyright system has taken Rand Paul’s presidential announcement offline; Washington Post, 4/7/15

Philip Bump, Washington Post; YouTube’s copyright system has taken Rand Paul’s presidential announcement offline:

"During his announcement on Tuesday, Rand Paul entered and left to the song, "Shuttin' Detroit Down," as Business Insider notes. The song is a twangy lament about the state of the economy that dates back a few years; the copyright stamp on the YouTube video reads "(c) 2009 WMG." WMG, of course, is Warner Music Group.

We've reached out to both WMG and YouTube for comment, and will update this article when we hear back. But it's hard not to see some humor in the situation. Rand Paul's spirited cry against government intervention has been blocked from view because YouTube lets huge music companies preemptively apply copyright law.

Looks like Paul just got another plank in his campaign platform."

Law Firm Founds Project to Fight ‘Revenge Porn’; Deal Book, 1/29/15

Deal Book, Matthew Goldstein; Law Firm Founds Project to Fight ‘Revenge Porn’ :

"The litigation is the handiwork of a new initiative by K&L Gates, a Pittsburgh-based law firm. Begun in late September, its Cyber Civil Rights Legal Project has roughly 50 lawyers at the firm volunteering their time...

The K&L program not only advises victims as to what legal steps can be taken to sue for damages, it also works with victims to consider the pros and cons of reporting online abuse to prosecutors. In instances where the victims have taken nude selfies or videos of themselves, the K&L lawyers are using the protections offered by federal copyright law to demand that the websites take down the images or risk being sued along with the perpetrators.

More often than not, commercial pornography websites, especially those based in the United States, will comply with a request to avoid any further legal entanglement.

But if a victim wants to bring a federal copyright lawsuit, there is a catch. In many cases, she or he would first need to register any videos or photos to be protected with the United States Copyright Office. In other words, to use copyright law as a hammer, a victim must publicly register a photo or video that she or he would rather no one ever see."

Ford Tries to Shut Down Independent Repair Tool with Copyright; Electronic Frontier Foundation, 1/6/15

Kit Walsh, Electronic Frontier Foundation; Ford Tries to Shut Down Independent Repair Tool with Copyright:

"At EFF, we think people ought to be able to understand how their devices work and repair them without asking permission of the manufacturer. We also think independent repair companies should to be able to compete with manufacturers in the aftermarket. Simply put, you should be able to fix your stuff or choose someone you trust to do it for you.

The Ford Motor Company, however, takes a different view. It recently sued Autel, a manufacturer of third-party diagnostics for automobiles, for creating a diagnostic tool that includes a list of Ford car parts and their specifications. Ford claims that it owns a copyright on this list of parts, the "FFData file," and thus can keep competitors from including it in their diagnostic tools. It also claims that Autel violated the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act by writing a program to defeat the "encryption technology and obfuscation" that Ford used to make the file difficult to read."

Copyright Law Is Being Rewritten Right Now, and You Can Help; Wired.com, 12/8/14

Kyle Wiens, Wired.com; Copyright Law Is Being Rewritten Right Now, and You Can Help:

"Strap in, folks—because we’re about to talk copyright law. I’m aware that as soon as I string the words “copyright” and “law” together, eyes start to glaze over. I get it. Copyright law isn’t Kim-Kardashian’s-oiled-butt level stuff; it doesn’t break the internet. But important things hardly ever do. Believe it or not, copyright law is shaping up to be the next big battleground in technology. And its fundamentally redefining ownership.

Copyright isn’t just about pirating music or downloading DVDs anymore. Like a creature alive, copyright is evolving and expanding. Traditional “dumb” products are being replaced by an internet of things — and copyright is hitching along for the ride. Its DNA is being woven through the programming that powers your car, the firmware in your phone, the code in your kid’s talking teddy bear, and the software that calibrates your hearing aid."

A Stolen Video of My Daughter Went Viral. Here’s What I Learned; New York Times, 9/26/14

Carrie Goldman, New York Times; A Stolen Video of My Daughter Went Viral. Here’s What I Learned:

"In early September, someone downloaded my video of Cleo, stripped it of all identifying information, changed the title from “Cleo on Equality” to “Wisdom of a 4-Year-Old”, and re-uploaded it to YouTube, passing it off as his or her own video. A woman in Amsterdam posted an embedded version of the stolen video to her Facebook page, from which it went viral. Within a matter of days, the stripped-down version of the video had been shared over 80,000 times.

I only learned about it when the pirated video began appearing in the news feed of people who recognized Cleo and noticed that it was not linked to any of my accounts. I felt sick on multiple levels. I have always known, of course, that the mere act of uploading a video to any digital site means potentially losing control over that content. But now it had happened, and even though the shares appeared to be harmless — approving, even — it was still terrifying. What if someone decided to do something creepy with it?

There was also a part of me that saw all the comments lauding Cleo’s grasp of acceptance, and I wanted those people to be linked back to my anti-bullying work. I missed the opportunity to share what I do for a living with a wide audience. I was sad and confused. Was I upset because the video was out there being viewed by tons of strangers, or was I upset because it was out there and I wasn’t getting credit? Both, probably...

I knew I had rights under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Since I speak to students and teachers all the time about good digital citizenship, I knew what steps to take next:

• Do not retaliate against someone online

• Take a screen shot and record the evidence

• Use this online form to report the violation to Facebook.

• Use this online form to report a copyright infringement on YouTube."

A Bill to Unlock Cellphones; New York Times, 7/11/14

Editorial Board, New York Times; A Bill to Unlock Cellphones:

"The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved a good measure that would make it legal for Americans to “unlock” their cellphones, making it easier to switch wireless providers. The House passed a similar bill earlier this year."

Haitian Photographer Wins Major U.S. Copyright Victory; New York Times, 11/23/13

James Estrin, New York Times; Haitian Photographer Wins Major U.S. Copyright Victory: "Photographers have struggled financially over the last decade as millions of images have been taken and published on the Web without proper attribution or compensation. And when photographers try to pursue copyright violators, it is often difficult and expensive. On Friday, the Haitian photographer Daniel Morel won a major copyright victory after a four-year fight over images he had originally sent out via social media. A Manhattan jury found that Agence France-Presse and its American distributor Getty Images willfully infringed upon Mr. Morel’s copyright of eight pictures he took of the 2010 Haiti earthquake and awarded him $1.22 million."

“Buffy vs Edward” remix unfairly removed by Lionsgate; ArsTechnica.com, 1/9/13

Jonathan McIntosh, ArsTechnica.com; “Buffy vs Edward” remix unfairly removed by Lionsgate: "Buffy vs Edward has now been offline for 3 weeks. Over the past year, before the takedown, the remix had been viewed an average of 34,000 times per month. Since none of YouTube’s internal systems were able to prevent this abuse by Lionsgate and our direct outreach to the content owner hit a brick wall, with the help of New Media Rights I have now filed an official DMCA counter-notification with YouTube. Lionsgate has 14 days to either allow the remix back online or sue me. We will see what happens."

Appeals Court Revives Viacom Suit Against YouTube; New York Times, 4/5/12

Brian Stelter, New York Times; Appeals Court Revives Viacom Suit Against YouTube:

"A federal appeals court on Thursday reversed a lower court’s decision to throw out a $1 billion lawsuit filed against YouTube by Viacom and other media companies five years ago.

The copyright infringement suit, which has become a symbol of the clash between entrenched media companies and the upstarts that compete with them, sought damages for unauthorized video clips from shows like “The Daily Show With Jon Stewart” that had been uploaded by users to YouTube."

[Book Review]; Free Ride: How Digital Parasites Are Destroying the Culture Business and How the Culture Business Can Fight Back, by Robert Levine; Business Week, 11/3/11

[Book Review] David Kamp, Business Week; Free Ride by Robert Levine:

"Now, as if to bolster Sulzberger’s resolve, comes Free Ride, Robert Levine’s unrelenting indictment of the free-content ethos that has dominated digital activism. Know that old Irving Kristol maxim that a neoconservative is a liberal who has been mugged by reality? Well, Free Ride is the book for the Net utopian who has been mugged by insolvency. It’s a riposte of sorts to Chris Anderson’s 2009 book Free: The Future of a Radical Price, which posits that in the digital economy, “free is not just an option, it’s the inevitable endpoint.”

Levine, a former executive editor of Billboard magazine, is here to say that this line of thinking is, to use the clinical macroeconomics term, a load of bollocks. The model of offering up content for free and making up for this lost revenue stream through advertising may work well for the likes of Google (GOOG), YouTube, and the Huffington Post, but it’s hell on the original-content creators upon which these sites ultimately depend: the professional class of reporters, authors, musicians, filmmakers, and producers whose work—books, articles, songs, TV shows, and movies—is still what the public is ultimately looking for."

[Editorial] A New Try at Curbing Piracy; New York Times, 6/16/11

[Editorial] New York Times; A New Try at Curbing Piracy:

"It remains to be seen whether the new approach will do better in curbing piracy, which is starting to evolve from BitTorrent downloads — currently the main vehicle of piracy — to streaming and other less detectable techniques. But it is well worth a try."

Doctors and dentists tell patients, "all your review are belong to us"; ArsTechnica.com, 5/24/11

Timothy B. Lee, ArsTechnica.com; Doctors and dentists tell patients, "all your review are belong to us" :

"The agreement that Dr. Cirka's staff asked me to sign on that February morning began by claiming to offer stronger privacy protections than those guaranteed by HIPAA, the 1996 law that governs patient privacy in the United States. In exchange for this extra dollop of privacy, it asked me to "exclusively assign all Intellectual Property rights, including copyrights" to "any written, pictorial, and/or electronic commentary" I might make about Dr. Cirka's services, including on "web pages, blogs, and/or mass correspondence," to Dr. Cirka. It also stipulated that if Dr. Cirka were to sue me due to a breach of the agreement, the prevailing party in the litigation will pay the loser's legal fees."

Google Streamlining its Approach to Digital Copyright; Wired.com, 12/2/10

Sam Gustin, Wired.com; Google Streamlining its Approach to Digital Copyright:

"As the battle over intellectual property and online piracy heats up, web titan Google is announcing some significant changes to the way it deals with copyright infringement on its ubiquitous search engine."