UK Copyright Infringement: ‘Fair Dealing’ in Digital World; National Law Review, 11/7/16

National Law Review; UK Copyright Infringement: ‘Fair Dealing’ in Digital World:

"Fair dealing is, in essence, a defence to copyright infringement. It allows you to copy part of a (usually already published) third party copyright work without having to get the copyright owner’s prior permission. For example, it would allow you to copy a short passage from a book, to reproduce a photograph or other image, or to use clips from television, film or online footage. You are not required to make any payment to the copyright owner in return for use of their material. You do not need to let the copyright owner know what you are doing and you can go ahead even if the copyright owner is aware of what you are doing and objects. It is irrelevant whether you are acting in a commercial or non-commercial context.

The fair dealing defence is set out in Chapter III of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA). There are a number of specific fair dealing exceptions covering, for example, libraries and educational settings. However, some aspects of the fair dealing defence are of wider application."

"Copy Me" episode 3: "Early Copyright History"; BoingBoing.net, 10/13/14

Cory Doctorow, BoingBoing.net; "Copy Me" episode 3: "Early Copyright History" :

"Alex writes, "It features censorship, hangings, dissent and criticism, a whole bunch of state and church control, angry queens, sad Stationers, and, of course, our terrible culprit: the printing press.""

Open data: slow down Whitehall's approach has the subtlety of a smash-and-grab-raider and it must take its own advice on best practice; Guardian, 4/18/14

Editorial, Guardian; Open data: slow down Whitehall's approach has the subtlety of a smash-and-grab-raider and it must take its own advice on best practice:

"Open data is potentially of incalculable value. The capacity to merge and manipulate information from a range of public bodies is already delivering wider benefit that ranges from better policing to environmental protection. It will lead to sharper policy making, cheaper drugs and improved health strategies. More contentiously, it could also develop into a valuable revenue stream for government. Whitehall is understandably excited about the potential. But it is approaching the whole open data project with the subtlety of a smash-and-grab raider...

A year ago, the government's own review into open data was published. Its first call was for a National Data Strategy, open to audit, that would set out what data should be released and in what form. Other recommendations included a focus on security, releasing anonymised data only into "safe havens" and introducing tough penalties on end users that fail to safeguard it. This may be part of the best practice HMRC insists it is committed to observing, but external experts are sceptical. Whitehall needs to take its own advice. It needs a strategy, one that explains exactly what the criteria for release of data are, sets out security safeguards that withstand challenge and introduces tough penalties for any breach that demonstrate a genuine respect for privacy."

Modernizing an English Garden; New York Times, 10/4/13

Adam Nicolson, New York Times; Modernizing an English Garden: "The National Trust accepted Sissinghurst in 1967, and my father entered the last decades of his life secure in the idea that he had done the right thing. He was known as the Resident Donor and presided happily over the place as it boomed with the tourist revolution over the next three decades. He became a sort of constitutional monarch: advising and consulting. He built himself a little writing room in the garden, where visitors would find him charmingly and delightfully welcoming. His part-skeptical children used to call it the Resident Donor Display Cabinet. He was a caretaker, spending his days as the protector of his parents’ creation. When he fell ill in 2004, my wife, Sarah, and I and our two daughters, Rosie and Molly, left our own farmhouse and went back to live at Sissinghurst. And when he died later that year, we stayed on, largely, I think, out of a sense of duty to this strange unowned inheritance, a mere tenancy at a place everything encouraged us to think of as ours. It did not go well. The new setup was something of a shock. We had moved into a museum: our dogs not allowed in the garden, being shouted at by gardeners if they did wander in; our children not allowed near the greenhouses; our cars to be parked in exactly prealigned ways; instructions that we were not to have parties on the weekends; that any photograph we took inside or outside the house was to be the copyright of the National Trust — I said no to the most invasive of these requests — and so on."

Paper Finds Little Success In ‘Three-Strikes’ IP Enforcement Programmes; Intellectual Property Watch, 9/10/13

Intellectual Property Watch; Paper Finds Little Success In ‘Three-Strikes’ IP Enforcement Programmes: "“Evaluating Graduated Response,” authored by Rebecca Giblin of the Monash University Faculty of Law, is available here. The abstract of the paper reads: “It has been more than three years since the first countries began implementing ‘graduated responses’, requiring ISPs [internet service providers] to take a range of measures to police their users’ copyright infringements. Graduated responses now exist in a range of forms in seven jurisdictions. Right-holders describe them as ‘successful’ and ‘effective’ and are agitating for their further international roll-out. But what is the evidence in support of these claims?” The paper looks at schemes in France, New Zealand, Taiwan, South Korea, the United Kingdom, Ireland and the United States and evaluates “the extent to which they are actually achieving the copyright law’s aims,” it says."

Richard O'Dwyer's two-year extradition ordeal ends in New York; Guardian, 12/6/12

Adam Gabbatt, Guardian; Richard O'Dwyer's two-year extradition ordeal ends in New York: "A British student's two-year fight to avoid extradition to the US ended in less than five minutes on Thursday, when Richard O'Dwyer signed an agreement in a New York court to avoid prosecution and a potential 10-year jail term for breaking copyright laws with the file-sharing website he set up as a teenager."

[Video] How did Richard O'Dwyer strike a deal to avoid extradition?, 11/28/12

[Video: 1 min. 49 sec.] James Ball, Guardian; How did Richard O'Dwyer strike a deal to avoid extradition? : "Guardian data journalist James Ball explains how Richard O'Dwyer, the university student who created a website which linked to programmes and films online for free, has reached an agreement to avoid extradition to the US over copyright infringement allegations. In June, Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales launched a campaign with the Guardian in defence of O'Dwyer."

Wikipedia founder hails extradition deal with US and calls for law reform; Guardian, 11/28/12

Lizzy Davies, James Ball, Owen Bowcott, Guardian; Wikipedia founder hails extradition deal with US and calls for law reform: "Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has called for a review of Anglo-US extradition arrangements after a legal agreement struck by Sheffield Hallam student Richard O'Dwyer to avoid extradition to America on copyright charges. Wales, who launched a campaign with the Guardian against O'Dwyer's extradition that garnered more than 250,000 signatures, welcomed a settlement announced in the high court on Wednesday morning, and called for reform to prevent similar cases in future... O'Dwyer faced up to 10 years in prison in the US over copyright charges relating a website he set up, TVShack.net, which allowed users to share links to free places to watch TV and movies."

Divergent Approaches To Copyright Reform Emerge In Europe; Intellectual Property Watch, 8/3/12

Dugie Standeford, Intellectual Property Watch; Divergent Approaches To Copyright Reform Emerge In Europe:

"Two very different views of copyright reform emerged this week, one from a report commissioned by the UK government, the other from a French citizens’ advocacy group. The former envisions an intricately linked system of digital rights exchanges and databases to streamline copyright licensing, the latter broad, “non-market” sharing of protected works between individuals, among other things. Whether either approach is feasible remains to be seen, and, as always, the devil’s in the details, lawyers say."

Extradition Suspect Calculated the Savings From Piracy; New York Times, 7/13/12

Somini Sengupta, New York Times; Extradition Suspect Calculated the Savings From Piracy:

"Helpfully for the authorities, Mr. O’Dwyer also did the math for his users, spelling out, according to the Justice Department, exactly how much money its users were saving. It reminded users that they could have spent up to $10 on a movie ticket, $10 on “a typical US nacho-Coke or popcorn-Coke combo,” and another $5 on “typical US parking.”

Part of the Justice Department’s case against Mr. O’Dwyer seems to be show that he sought to make it as simple as possible to watch movies and shows available on other sites, including copyrighted material...

Meanwhile, Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikimedia, who has stepped up to defend Mr. O’Dwyer from extradition, was quoted by The Hill, a Washington-based news site, as offering the entertainment industry some unsolicited advice: Make it easier for consumers to buy content online."

U.S. Pursuing a Middleman in Web Piracy; New York Times, 7/12/12

Somini Sengupta, New York Times; U.S. Pursuing a Middleman in Web Piracy:

"Richard O’Dwyer, an enterprising 24-year-old college student from northern England, has found himself in the middle of a fierce battle between two of America’s great exports: Hollywood and the Internet.

At issue is a Web site he started that helped visitors find American movies and television shows online. Although the site did not serve up pirated content, American authorities say it provided links to sites that did. The Obama administration is seeking to extradite Mr. O’Dwyer from Britain on criminal charges of copyright infringement. The possible punishment: 10 years in a United States prison.

The case is the government’s most far-reaching effort so far to crack down on foreigners suspected of breaking American laws. It is unusual because it goes after a middleman, who the authorities say made a fair amount of money by pointing people to pirated content. Mr. O’Dwyer’s backers say the prosecution goes too far, squelching his free-speech right to publish links to other Web sites."

Home secretary upholds decision to extradite Richard O'Dwyer; Guardian, 7/9/12

James Ball and Alan Travis, Guardian; Home secretary upholds decision to extradite Richard O'Dwyer:

"The home secretary, Theresa May, has told the House of Commons that she will not revisit plans to extradite Sheffield Hallam student Richard O'Dwyer to the US on copyright charges, saying the decision had "already been taken".

O'Dwyer faces a maximum sentence of 10 years in a US jail for alleged copyright offences, for which the UK declined to press charges. The charges relate to a website, tvshack.net, which O'Dwyer when he was 19 and which linked to places to watch TV and films online."

A Store of Images, From a Time When ‘Cut and Paste’ Meant Just That; New York Times, 10/30/11

Noam Cohen, New York Times; A Store of Images, From a Time When ‘Cut and Paste’ Meant Just That:

"THE sign in blue lettering read “Copyright-Free Images,” which may not rank with “Zero Percent Financing” or “Everything Must Go” when it comes to sales pitches. But it does have “free” in it, and it was enough to catch my eye while visiting London."

The Empire Strikes Out: Artist Prevails in British Suit Over ‘Star Wars’ Costumes; New York Times, 7/27/11

Dave Itzkoff, New York Times; The Empire Strikes Out: Artist Prevails in British Suit Over ‘Star Wars’ Costumes:

"BBC News reported that the Supreme Court in Britain, the highest court of appeal for civil cases in that country, ruled on Wednesday that the costume replicas created by Mr. Ainsworth were functional rather than artistic works and thus not fully subject to copyright laws."

Prime Minister: UK needs US-style fair use to spur innovation; ArsTechnica.com, 11/5/10

Nate Anderson, ArsTechnica.com; Prime Minister: UK needs US-style fair use to spur innovation:

""The problem David Cameron will come up against is that 'fair use' may be difficult, if not impossible, to establish in current European law," he wrote today. "EU copyright does not allow a general, US-style 'fair use' provision, but has an exhaustive list of possible user rights, like format shifting, back ups and parodies. Each EU country chooses which rights they wish to allow.""

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/11/prime-minister-uk-needs-us-style-fair-use-to-spur-innovation.ars

Antipiracy lawyers pirate from other antipiracy lawyers; ArsTechnica.com, 9/30/10

Nate Anderson, ArsTechnica.com; Antipiracy lawyers pirate from other antipiracy lawyers:

"Crafting original content takes real time and effort; it's much easier to customize something created by others (see, for instance, the copyright page for Dunlap, Grubb, & Weaver, the law firm behind the US Copyright Group; then compare to this and this).

So many people license material, as Crossley did (and as Ars does with the stock photo elements that our graphic design genius, Aurich Lawson, turns into pictures of, say, a tie-wearing praying mantis). Others just take it without permission—but grabbing it from a firm that specializes in copyright prosecutions seems like a pretty dim idea."

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/09/antipiracy-lawyers-pirate-from-other-antipiracy-lawyers.ars

Sunday Times faces £150,000-plus payout over Jimi Hendrix CD; (London) Guardian, 8/6/10

Josh Halliday, (London) Guardian; Sunday Times faces £150,000-plus payout over Jimi Hendrix CD: US companies linked with musician's estate win ruling that paper did not obtain proper copyright clearance for giveaway disc:

"High court judge Sir William Blackburne last Friday ruled that the Sunday Times covermount had delayed by a year the receipt of $5.8m in earnings to Experience Hendrix and Last Experience from the Hendrix concert film. He ordered Times Newspapers to pay damages equivalent to one year's interest on that sum.

The exact damages figure is still being worked out by the two sides' legal teams, but MediaGuardian.co.uk understands it will be just over $250,000."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/aug/06/sunday-times-jimi-hendrix-cd

The Day of the Jackal; Economist, Prospero Blog, 7/27/10

Economist, Prospero Blog; The Day of the Jackal:

"ANDREW WYLIE is a famously shrewd literary agent, having acquired his nickname, “The Jackal”, as a result of his ability to negotiate unusually large advances from publishers for the authors he represents. Not surprisingly, this has helped him build up a roster of clients that includes many leading writers (he represents, among others, Salman Rushdie, Philip Roth, the estate of John Updike and several Economist writers, including the editor). So Mr Wylie’s announcement last week of a deal with Amazon to publish electronic versions of books by several of his authors has understandably been viewed by the traditional publishers that he will bypass as a declaration of war.

Mr Wylie is starting by publishing electronic versions of some classics, such as Mr Roth’s “Portnoy’s Complaint” and Updike’s “Rabbit” novels. Some publishers argue that they own the electronic rights to such classics, under contracts signed before anyone thought there would be electronic books—an ownership claim that authors and their agents vigorously dispute. Random House, one of the giants of book publishing, reacted to Mr Wylie’s move by announcing that it now regards the Wylie Agency as a competitor, and that “Random House on a worldwide basis will not be entering into any new English-language business agreements with the Wylie Agency until this situation is resolved.” Random House’s move was backed by HarperCollins UK, a book-publishing division of News Corp.

Not surprisingly, authors are rallying behind Mr Wylie. On July 26th the Authors Guild issued a statement arguing that “to a large extent, publishers have brought this on themselves.” In particular, in contracts for works produced since agents started discussing royalties for electronic books, publishers have at most been willing to offer authors 25% of net revenues on e-books, compared with the typical 50% split for printed books.

The Authors Guild predicts that low e-book royalties will not last, and publishers are simply playing for time, taking their extra margin while they can. But with Amazon revealing last week that it sold more e-books than hardbacks in its latest quarter, authors will care increasingly about their cut from e-books than from print—and their market power will surely prevail. Marjorie Scardino, the boss of Pearson, a firm which owns several book publishers, including Penguin (and is also part-owner of The Economist), said on July 26th that eventually “we will see a rise in royalty rates.”

Still, Mr Wylie’s move may also give authors some grounds for disquiet, as an agent publishing works by those authors he represents gives rise to obvious potential conflicts of interest. As the Authors Guild points out, “a major agency starting a publishing company is weird, no matter how you look at it. This sort of weirdness will only multiply, however, as long as authors don't share fairly in the rewards of electronic publishing. Publishers seeking to manage this transition well should cut authors in appropriately.”

Publishing houses tempted to keep dragging their feet should consider the possibility that they risk losing more than just having to give up a further 25% of net revenues: e-books are fast coming to represent a big share of writers' income (on July 27th Amazon said Stieg Larsson, author of the bestselling "Millennium Trilogy" had become the first writer to sell 1m copies on its Kindle e-reader), and if dealing directly with big e-book sellers like Amazon proves successful, many writers may start to ask themselves whether they still need to sign up with traditional publishers at all."

http://www.economist.com/blogs/prospero/2010/07/andrew_wylies_publishing_deal_amazon

British Online Copyright Laws Draw Debates; New York Times, 3/4/10

Nick Bilton, New York Times; British Online Copyright Laws Draw Debates:

"An article published on Thursday in, The Guardian, discusses a debate taking place in the British Parliament around a new “digital economy bill.”

One amendment in particular is stirring a lot of discussion about its impact on content online. The Guardian writes:

The new proposal – which was passed in the House of Lords by 165 votes to 140 – gives a high court judge the right to issue an injunction against a Web site accused of hosting a “substantial” amount of copyright infringing material, potentially forcing the entire site offline.

Critics say the major problem with this amendment is that a judge could shut down a Web site because of copyright infringement, even if the site’s manager didn’t put the content online.

What is left unanswered is how a company can be held accountable for every piece of content placed on its site. Many critics of this bill and others in Europe say it is most likely to result in the stifling of creativity, innovation and free speech. In the United States, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act offers some protection against liability to Internet service providers and Web sites that host copyrighted material uploaded by third parties.

There are similar tensions over Internet content and privacy elsewhere in Europe. Last week the Italian court held three of Google’s top executives accountable for a defamatory video placed on YouTube by teenagers. And the French parliament approved a recent bill that will crack down on Internet piracy by banning people from the Web if they are caught downloading copyrighted content more than three times.

When it comes to the Italian ruling in the YouTube case, Google has argued that it can’t possibly police every piece of content entering its Web site. Every minute on YouTube there are over 20 hours of video uploaded to the site, which ads up to nearly 30,000 hours of video a day. Google, it can be argued, might have the resources to hire thousands of people needed to view every video. But every other video, image, music and storage Web site would also have to monitor its content.

Monitoring that content is financially, and probably physically, impossible.

Some also argue that strict legal cases, including the latest British laws, would deter some companies from operating within these countries for fear that the potential legal costs could outweigh the returns."

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/04/british-online-copyright-laws-draw-debates/?scp=1&sq=copyright&st=cse

Call for study of threat from "offline" filesharing; (London) Guardian, 1/15/10

Katie Allen, (London) Guardian; Call for study of threat from "offline" filesharing:

Swapping of music and video on hard drives and memory sticks could be just as big a threat as online firesharing, says report

"Policymakers urgently need better information on people's attitudes to copyright law, according to a report out today warning that friends swapping hard drives and memory sticks could pose as great a piracy threat to media companies as online filesharers.

The Strategic Advisory Board for Intellectual Property (Sabip), a body set up to advise the government, has been looking into "offline" copyright infringement after its research last year into online piracy threw up questions about how consumers get films, music and games for free.

"There's a whole big question here around what is happening offline digitally, the swapping of discs and data in that world. There's a lot of it going on," said Sabip board member Dame Lynne Brindley.

Brindley, chief executive of the British Library, said existing research did not give a clear picture of consumer behaviour. While there was some data on the proportion of people buying counterfeit CDs, DVDs and video games – estimated at between 7% and 16% of the population – Sabip was concerned that more needed to be known about other copyright breaches, such as hard-drive swapping and files being shared by wireless Bluetooth connections.

David Lammy, minister for intellectual property, said such offline copying had to be addressed. He said the Sabip research moved the focus from "geeky teenagers" and on to adults as well.

He said: "The need for research into this area is hugely important so we can understand consumer behaviour, to understand how to enforce copyright and to understand the scale of the problems we are experiencing."

Sabip's review of available national and international research concluded: "Policymakers urgently need a better understanding of how consumers behave in both the online and offline digital environment."

The review, conducted by BOP Consulting, also sought to show that consumers were "more interested in factors such as price, quality, and availability of material, rather than its legal status". It said: "Consumer behaviour online and offline in the digital world needs to be looked at from a new perspective – one that encompasses consumer choice rather than just from the viewpoint of criminal behaviour."

Lammy said that highlighted the need for "public education and for the right pricing and business models to adapt to this environment".

The review also concluded that "evidence" was mixed as to whether illegally consuming content complemented legal consumption – a point of much contention among music industry figures. Some artists claim filesharing can lead people to buy more legal products.

Duncan Calow, a media lawyer at DLA Piper, said the prevalence of offline copyright infringement – whether wilful or unwitting – underlines the need for media companies to better explain to consumers what they could and could not do with the products they bought.

As technology improves and film companies and publishers become more affected by piracy, he expects to see more copyright guidance from rights holders but not necessarily finger-wagging and a list of "don'ts". No one wanted a repeat of the bad press sparked by record labels' pursuit of individual filesharers in the courts.

"Hollywood has learned from looking at the music industry. Those same concerns are also in the publishing industry with the rise of the ebook. They are all desperate to avoid that kind of stand-off," he said.

"So they are starting to try in a fairer way to explain to their consumers what it is they are selling to them ... what is being offered in terms of how you can enjoy content.""

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jan/15/offline-copyright-breaches-report