Faculty Council reexamines lost intellectual property rights policy; The Ithacan, April 24, 2019

Ashley Stalnecker, The Ithacan; 

Faculty Council reexamines lost intellectual property rights policy

"Peter Rothbart, professor in the Department of Music Theory, History and Composition, said that when he was the chair of the Faculty Council before Swensen took over the position in Fall 2016, the Intellectual Property Policy Committee extensively researched documents from other academic institutions and asked for input on the policy from staff, students, faculty and administrators.

“The resulting document was among the most liberal and supportive of creators of content and invention offered by any academic institution,” Rothbart said."

YouTube CEO asks creators to ‘take action’ against EU copyright law; CNet, October 22, 2018

Richard Nieva, CNet; YouTube CEO asks creators to ‘take action’ against EU copyright law

""This legislation poses a threat to both your livelihood and your ability to share your voice with the world," Wojcicki wrote in a blog post. "And, if implemented as proposed, Article 13 threatens hundreds of thousands of jobs, European creators, businesses, artists and everyone they employ."

She added, "Please take a moment to learn more about how it could affect your channel and take action immediately." She also asked creators to protest using the hashtag #SaveYourInternet."

Music Modernization Act Heads to Oval Office; The National Law Reviw, October 5, 2018

Erin S. Hennessy, Annie Allison, Jonathon K. Hance, The National Law Review; Music Modernization Act Heads to Oval Office

"The Music Modernization Act (MMA) is headed to the President's desk for signature following unanimous approval from the House of Representatives and the Senate. The bill, now called the "Orrin G. Hatch Music Modernization Act" (H.R. 1551),  provides a significant update to how artists are paid for their music. The Copyright Alliance plugged the bill as "the most significant improvement of music copyright law in more than a generation, making it easier for creators across the music industry to earn a fair living through their creativity."

The MMA combines the following three separate pieces of legislation to bring music royalties into the modern era:

• The Music Modernization Act of 2018, S. 2334, which updates licensing and royalties for music streaming services;
  
• The CLASSICS Act (Compensating Legacy Artists for their Songs, Service, & Important Contributions to Society Act) which opens up music royalties for pre-1972 songs; and
  
• The AMP Act (Allocation for Music Producers Act) which provides for royalties for music producers and engineers."
  

Europe's Copyright Reforms Are More Than (Just) A Boring Policy Change; NPR, September 27, 2018

Andrew Flanagan, NPR; Europe's Copyright Reforms Are More Than (Just) A Boring Policy Change

"In the "Information Wants To Be Free" corner, you have advocates like Cory Doctorow, who is of the opinion that regulations on the Internet can have a stifling effect on freedom of expression. They want to preserve the web "as a place where we can fight the other fights" like "inequality, antitrust, race and gender, speech and democratic legitimacy," as Doctorow put it in a recent podcast. (Doctorow obliquely references a 2004 copyright dispute around Woody Guthrie's "This Land Is Your Land," which Guthrie, in an unconfirmed statement, said he didn't "give a dern" if others performed.) Doctorow's point is that creativity is best when it's unanchored from profit motive, and thus available to be copied freely. (Doctorow himself walks the walk, making his novels available for no charge.) James Rhodes' recent experience with music that wasn't even protected by copyright isn't exactly encouraging in this regard.

Meanwhile, some copyright holders are very much interested in being paid for their creations. Lisa Alter, a visiting professor at Yale Law School and practicing attorney who specializes in music copyright, tells NPR: "Obviously, whenever there's something new, there will be a period of time where systems are worked out and glitches, but I don't see those insurmountable in the year 2018." As to situations like the one Rhodes experienced with his Bach video? "Could there ever be a erroneous takedown? Sure, but then you let them know and they should put it back up," she says. "But I don't see it being an epidemic. And the technology will get better, the filtering system will improve."

Law Professors Urge Senate Judiciary Committee to Reject or Amend CLASSICS Act; Public Knowledge, May 15, 2018

Press Release, Public Knowledge; Law Professors Urge Senate Judiciary Committee to Reject or Amend CLASSICS Act

"Yesterday, more than 40 intellectual property law professors sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), and all members of the committee, urging them to reject or, at a minimum, amend the CLASSICS Act to ensure that its provisions are in line with existing federal copyright law.

The Senate recently combined the Classics Act, a flawed bill that hurts consumers, with the Music Modernization Act, a bill that creates a database of songwriters and performers to ensure that creators receive fair compensation for their work. Public Knowledge supports the Music Modernization Act, but agrees with these law professors that the CLASSICS Act harms the public interest. Public Knowledge contends that the CLASSICS Act fails to provide full federal protection for pre-1972 sound recordings, making it out of sync with the rest of copyright law. 

The following can be attributed to Meredith Rose, Policy Counsel at Public Knowledge:

 “The expert consensus is clear: The CLASSICS Act is a problematic attempt to shortcut full federalization of pre-1972 copyrights. At best a half-measure, at worst a ploy to avoid difficult but necessary conversations about artist and consumer rights, CLASSICS complicates the status of legacy recordings without any countervailing benefit to protect nonprofit users and archivists. We welcome the insight of the more than 40 professors on this letter and look forward to working to bring true reform and harmonization to these works.”  

You may view the letter here. You may also view Meredith Rose’s testimony from today’s hearing on “Protecting and Promoting Music Creation for the 21st Century” for more information on the CLASSICS Act and why it should be amended or rejected from the Music Modernization Act."

Steel City Con 2018, Monroeville, Pennsylvania (Greater Pittsburgh Area), April 13-15, 2018

Kip Currier; Steel City Con 2018

April 14th I attended the Pittsburgh area's Steel City Con--a several-times-a-year gathering for comic book/toy sellers and eclectic entrepreneurs, celebrities, cosplayers, and pop culture enthusiasts of all ages.

James "Kip" Currier (c) 2018

As in previous years, I spoke with some very interesting and creative small business folks, who are using Intellectual Property in novel ways. Like this example, where iconic comic book covers are transformed by adding wrestlers:

James "Kip" Currier (c) 2018

James "Kip" Currier (c) 2018

I'll be posting an upcoming piece shortly that focuses on some of these entrepreneurs.

Cosplayers (i.e. translation: costume-sporting fans) were in abundance (on a much-welcomed warm weather day!), as you can see from my pics:

2 Deadpools in SPF-compliant costumes, basking in 80+ degree F. sunshine.
James "Kip" Currier (c) 2018

Colonel Sanders--after a 5K run
James "Kip" Currier (c) 2018

True Story:

Kip: May I take your photo, Colonel Sanders?

"Colonel Sanders": Yes--if you can name the 11 herbs and spices in my Original Recipe?

Me: (laughing) Uh, Colonel Sanders, I can't name them... because they're protected as one of the world's most famous trade secrets.

Colonel Sanders: (Big grin--while high-fiving me!)

WHAT IF ‘STAR TREK’ WERE FREE? HOW THE STORIED SCI-FI FRANCHISE COULD INSPIRE COPYRIGHT REFORM; Newsweek, March 5, 2018

Andrew Whalen, Newsweek; 

WHAT IF ‘STAR TREK’ WERE FREE? HOW THE STORIED SCI-FI FRANCHISE COULD INSPIRE COPYRIGHT REFORM

"CBS and Paramount are unlikely to see things the same way. While Star Trek: Discovery press releases trumpet the “ideology and hope for the future that inspired a generation of dreamers and doers,” plans for streaming market domination depend upon exclusivity. The metaphor equating artistic expression and property has become so ingrained that companies regularly reduce their consumers to provisional licensees, subject to whatever controls the copyright holder decides upon, even long after the point of purchase.

“Star Trek stands on the shoulders of giants. It exists because they plundered some of the most interesting stories and memes of science fiction, just as all science fiction writers do, to tell their own story. And to argue that when they did it that was the legitimate progress of art and whenever anyone else does it, it's theft, is pretty self-serving and kind of obviously bullshit,” Doctorow said. “It's a ridiculous thing for a law to ban something that ancient and fundamental to how we experience art.”

Countering the monopoly exercised by copyright holders will require a broader social realignment, under which people come to understand art as a shared cultural endowment, rather than product—a mindset beyond capital."

Manhattan teen cartoonist prompts review of Scholastic awards’ copyright rules; amNewYork, March 5, 2018

Nicole Brown, amNewYork; Manhattan teen cartoonist prompts review of Scholastic awards’ copyright rules

"“How come the @Scholastic @artandwriting award requires kids to sign over ‘irrevocable copyright’ if they win?! And why is it hidden in the ‘Terms & Conditions’ link that no one reads? Is it weird that I think that’s wrong?” [Sasha Matthews] wrote in December...

...[T]he ability to display the work could be granted through a license, Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig said.

“Once you enter into a license to promote the work, you have all the permissions you need,” he told amNewYork. “That’s exactly what they could have done here, but rather than entering a license, they just grabbed the copyright.”

Matthews wrote about the copyright issue for a school assignment and got it published in February on the blog Boing Boing."

How a rigid fair-use standard would harm free speech and fundamentally undermine the Internet; Los Angeles Times, June 1, 2017

Art Neill, Los Angeles Times; How a rigid fair-use standard would harm free speech and fundamentally undermine the Internet

"In a recent Times op-ed article, Jonathan Taplin of the USC Annenberg Innovation Lab claimed that an “ambiguous“ fair use definition is emboldening users of new technologies to challenge copyright infringement allegations, including takedown notices. He proposes rewriting fair use to limit reuses of audio or video clips to 30 seconds or less, a standard he mysteriously claims is “widely accepted.”

In fact, this is not a widely accepted standard, and weakening fair use in this way will not address copyright infringement concerns on the Internet. It would hurt the music, film and TV industries as much as it would hurt individual creators...

Fair use is inextricably linked to our 1st Amendment right to free speech. We are careful with fair use because it’s the primary way consumers, creators and innovators share new ideas. It’s a good thing, and it is worth protecting."

Copyright system needs to be replaced: Vanderbilt professor; Research News @ Vanderbilt, April 20, 2017

Jim Patterson, Research News @ Vanderbilt; 

Copyright system needs to be replaced: Vanderbilt professor

"In his new book, (Re)stucturing Copyright: A Comprehensive Path to International Copyright Reform (2017, Edward Elgar Publishing), Gervais suggests replacing the current copyright system with something much simpler.

“I’m proposing a system that rewrites all the rights and exceptions in a structured way,” he said. “Ultimately, we need a new version of the Berne Convention. It would send a great signal if the countries got together and said, ‘Let’s fix this.’”

Gervais suggests a broader use of licensing without affecting fair use. This would allow the use of more copyrights but also help creators to get paid. He acknowledges there are some users who are determined not to pay, but believes it is less of a problem than it seems...

“If we put aside this civil war mentality between users and providers, there would probably be far less money lost to piracy than most people think.”"

It's Copyright Week: Join Us in the Fight for a Better Copyright Law; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), 1/16/17

Kerry Sheehan, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); 

It's Copyright Week: Join Us in the Fight for a Better Copyright Law

"We're taking part in Copyright Week, a series of actions and discussions supporting key principles that should guide copyright policy. Every day this week, various groups are taking on different elements of the law, and addressing what's at stake, and what we need to do to make sure that copyright promotes creativity and innovation...

Here are this year’s Copyright Week principles:

• Monday: Building and Defending the Public Domain. The public domain is our cultural commons and a crucial resource for innovation and access to knowledge. Copyright policy should strive to promote, and not diminish, a robust, accessible public domain.

• Tuesday: You Bought It, You Own It, You Fix It. Copyright law shouldn't interfere with your freedom to truly own your stuff: to repair it, tinker with it, recycle it, use it on any device, lend it, and then give it away (or re-sell it) when you're done.

• Wednesday: Transparency and Representation. Copyright policy must be set through a participatory, democratic, and transparent process. It should not be decided through back room deals, secret international agreements, or unilateral attempts to apply national laws extraterritorially.

• Thursday: 21st Century Creators. Copyright law should account for the interests of all creators, not just those backed by traditional copyright industries. YouTube creators, remixers, fan artists and independent musicians (among others) are all part of the community of creators that encourage cultural progress and innovation.

• Friday: Copyright and Free Speech. Freedom of expression is fundamental to our democratic system. Copyright law should promote, not restrict or suppress free speech.

Every day this week, we’ll be sharing links to blog posts and actions on these topics at https://www.eff.org/copyrightweek and at #CopyrightWeek.

If you’ve followed Copyright Week in past years, you may note that this year, we didn’t designate a specific day to focus on fair use. Fair use—the legal doctrine that permits many important uses of copyrighted works without permission or payment—is critical to the law’s ability to promote creativity, innovation, and freedom of expression. Fair use is a part of each of this year’s principles."

Elena Ferrante’s Right to a Pseudonym; Atlantic, 11/15/16

Atlantic; Elena Ferrante’s Right to a Pseudonym:

"Curiously, the United States remains possibly the only country in the world not to recognize an author’s right to be named as the creator of his or her own work, despite huge pressure from authors’ groups and legal experts to do so. American law provides for a limited “right of attribution,” as it is called in the U.S. Copyright Act, but only in relation to works of fine art. Writers, musicians, and creators working in other disciplines have no such right at all. Establishing one would bring the United States into line with the rest of the world—a good thing when creative works literally circulate without borders, and reputations must stand or fall on the global stage.

In Italy, the copyright law says that a pseudonym will be treated as equivalent to the author’s true name, unless (and until) the author chooses to reveal his or her identity. Both the language of the law, and its silences, are arguably significant. In no way is any outsider empowered to reveal an author’s “true” identity when the author has chosen to publish under a pseudonym. Italian law wouldn’t seem to condone a concerted effort such as Gatti’s to uncover Ferrante’s identity."

A Copyright Coup in Washington; Wall Street Journal, 11/2/16

Wall Street Journal; A Copyright Coup in Washington:

"Ms. Hayden is now looking for a copyright office successor, and don’t be surprised if she chooses someone whose experience includes time at Google. This is reason enough for Congress to take a look: If the position is open to political influence, then the register should be politically accountable—and report to elected officials, not the nation’s librarian.

Perhaps these are all coincidences and Ms. Hayden merely botched a personnel dispute. But she now has an opening to install a register friendly to Google, and anyone tempted to write off the Pallante dispute as bureaucratic squabbling should remember: The company’s goal is to defenestrate laws that protect property. The guarantee to own what you create is the reason entrepreneurs take the risks that power the economy—a reason guys like Larry Page and Sergey Brin start Google."

Change at the Copyright Office; Publishers Weekly, 10/28/16

Andrew Albanese, Publishers Weekly; Change at the Copyright Office:

"Could Pallante’s departure spur Congress to finally appropriate sufficient resources to modernize the Copyright Office, which virtually everyone agrees is badly needed and long overdue? Hayden herself said she intends to build on the work Pallante did in terms of modernizing the Copyright Office for the digital age.

Or, might Pallante’s removal push Congress to consider removing the office from the Library of Congress altogether? Pallante was certainly held in high esteem by lawmakers. But sources expressed doubt that in the current political climate Congress would seek to create a new federal bureaucracy for copyright—which is the domain of Congress—that would be headed by a presidential appointee.

At the very least, ALA’s Sheketoff observed that Pallante’s removal suggests that the future of the U.S. Copyright Office is a high priority for at least one government official—Carla Hayden."

Maria Pallante's Departure From the Copyright Office: What It Means, And Why It Matters; Billboard, 10/25/16

Robert Levine, Billboard; Maria Pallante's Departure From the Copyright Office: What It Means, And Why It Matters:

"Although Hayden spoke about the importance of copyright during her confirmation hearings, she is perceived to favor looser copyright laws, since she previously served as president of the American Library Association, an organization that lobbies for greater public access to creative works, sometimes as the expense of creators. The Obama Administration also has close ties to technology companies, which would like to see a Copyright Office that values fair use and other exceptions to copyright over the rights of creators and copyright owners.

Hillary Clinton is thought to be view copyright more favorably, but she hasn’t said much about the topic, and she initially addressed it in her “Initiative on Technology & Innovation” -- not an encouraging sign for creators. Donald Trump doesn’t appear to have said much about the topic."

Marvel Artist Complains After 'X-Men: Apocalypse' Giveaway Uses His Work; Hollywood Reporter,

Graeme McMillan, Hollywood Reporter; Marvel Artist Complains After 'X-Men: Apocalypse' Giveaway Uses His Work:

"Bill Sienkiewicz, known for work on such Marvel titles as X-Men spin-off New Mutants and Elektra: Assassin, took to Facebook to complain after discovering that Fox was giving away limited edition promotional replicas of an album cover used as a prop in the movie, using artwork he had created three decades earlier. Previously unaware of the promo item, he discovered its existence at Comic-Con itself when fans asked him to sign them, he explained.

"I've been doing this comic-book thing for years. I'm aware most everything is Work-Made-for-Hire," Sienkiewicz wrote on his post. "Still, I received no prior notification (a common courtesy), no thank you (ditto), no written credit in any form whatsoever either on the piece or in connection with the premium, absolutely no compensation and no comp copies of the album. It's like two losing trifectas wrapped in an altogether indifferent f--- you."

The artist, who originally created the image as part of a cover for Marvel's Dazzler No. 29 in 1983, in collaboration with Marvel's in-house designer Eliot R. Brown, went on to say that he had to be physically restrained by colleagues from "making a scene" at the Fox booth during the show about the giveaway.

"Am I over-reacting here?" he continued. "Do I have the right — at least on behalf of fellow creators — to, at the very least expect decent treatment and some kind of minuscule, even boilerplate, acknowledgment?"

"Jail for Self-Publishing Novels"; Bizarro, 7/16/16

Dan Piraro, Bizzaro:

"Jail for Self-Publishing Novels"

Batman v Superman: the latest exercise in corporate fan fiction; Guardian, 12/9/15

Noah Berlatsky, Guardian; Batman v Superman: the latest exercise in corporate fan fiction:

"Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster ended their creative input in the 1940s; for decades the duo’s main involvement with Superman was lawsuits over rights. Batman’s main creator, Bill Finger, was denied credit from the beginning by artist Bob Kane, and he died in poverty. Not much of a dawn of justice there.

At this point, there is no right or wrong version of Superman, or Batman, or Lex Luthor. Batman v Superman is just the latest exercise in corporate fan fiction, remixing bits and pieces of fan fiction based on fan fiction past. The result may be good, or bad, or mediocre, and you can love or hate Jesse Eisenberg’s performance for any number of reasons. But to say he’s not true to Luthor is to pretend that there’s some “true” version of Luthor to begin with – and to create a platonic, real Luthor who exists separately from, and overshadows, the original folks who, intentionally or by accident, came up with the character. Better to just take the upcoming film on its own merits, or lack thereof – and maybe give a nod to Leo Nowak, and his own stumbling lack of fidelity to Lex Luthor past."

At Comic-Con, Bring Out Your Fantasy and Fuel the Culture; New York Times, 7/15/15

A.O. Scott, New York Times; At Comic-Con, Bring Out Your Fantasy and Fuel the Culture:

"The deeper mythology of Comic-Con is that fans and creators are joined in communion, sharing in the holy work of imagination. The logic of popular culture today suggests that every fan is also an artist. This is literally true in the blossoming fields of fan art and fan fiction, in which devotees of intellectual properties (the ubiquitous San Diego shorthand for books, comics, movies and shows) make their own images and stories involving their favorite characters. Cosplay is a live-action form of fan art, or maybe fan nonfiction, and the owners of the intellectual property rights are careful not to interfere too much.

The organizers of Comic-Con, meanwhile, provide encouragement for fans who dream of professionalizing their passions. A smattering of panels offered advice on how to pitch an idea, how to market a product, how to make a living in a crowded marketplace. Social media and digital technology encourage the fantasy that everyone can make stuff and put it out there for everyone else.

Or maybe it isn’t a fantasy. The world of popular culture only gets bigger, and as it does it grows more diverse, more inclusive and more confounding."

Comic-Con Program; Comic Book Law School 303: Oh, And Another Thing, 7/24/10

Comic-Con Program; Comic Book Law School 303: Oh, And Another Thing:

"Noted attorney Michael Lovitz, author of the sold-out The Trademark and Copyright Book comic book, returns to deal with the more advanced (and often complicated) issues facing the creative community, particularly in light of the ever-expanding worlds of new media. Creators aren't the only ones facing potential problems and issues -- publishers, distributors, retailers, and even the ultimate consumers can find themselves facing legal issues they never expected. Infringements, misuse, tarnishment, dilution, knockoffs, lawsuits, satires, parodies, fair use, blogs, podcasts, tweets, and cybersquatters are just some of the many potential problems that may arise once creative works and products become accessible to others. This session explores how copyright and trademark rights are enforced, how one's legal muscles may be flexed, and what to do when finding yourself in a legal minefield. Plus, time permitting, discussion about recent legal decisions and pending cases that are likely to affect the field of popular culture and how they might play an important role in your creative and business plans. Note: The Comic Book Law School seminars are designed to provide relevant information and practice tips to practicing attorneys, as well as practical tips to creators and other professionals who may wish to attend. [This program is approved for 1.5 credits of California MCLE.]"

http://www.comic-con.org/cci/cci_search_results.php?strShow=27&chkCat%5B%5D=239