Showing posts with label permission. Show all posts
Showing posts with label permission. Show all posts

Friday, May 24, 2024

Copyright issues at OpenAI and other AI startups are ramping up; Fortune, May 23, 2024

JESSICA MATHEWS, Fortune ; Copyright issues at OpenAI and other AI startups are ramping up

"Last week, Sony Music Group sent out a letter to more than 700 companies building out or using generative AI models with a clear warning: If you’re going to use Sony’s content, you better have explicit permission."

Wednesday, August 2, 2023

Dua Lipa faces new copyright lawsuit over hit Levitating; BBC, August 2, 2023

Riyah Collins , BBC; Dua Lipa faces new copyright lawsuit over hit Levitating

"The legal action, which was filed in Los Angeles on Monday, claims Bosko is entitled to more than $20m (£15.6m).

It says British-Albanian star Dua Lipa had permission to use the talk box on the original recording but not on any remixes, Reuters reported.

It alleges the 27-year-old reused the work without permission on further releases, including The Blessed Madonna remix, which featured Madonna and Missy Elliott, another remix featuring DaBaby and a performance by Dua Lipa at the American Music Awards."

Monday, July 17, 2023

Thousands of authors urge AI companies to stop using work without permission; Morning Edition, NPR, July 17, 2023

, Morning Edition NPR; Thousands of authors urge AI companies to stop using work without permission

"Thousands of writers including Nora Roberts, Viet Thanh Nguyen, Michael Chabon and Margaret Atwood have signed a letter asking artificial intelligence companies like OpenAI and Meta to stop using their work without permission or compensation."

Saturday, July 8, 2023

Poet and translator to sue British Museum for copyright and moral rights infringement; The Art Newspaper, July 7, 2023

 Anny Shaw, The Art Newspaper; Poet and translator to sue British Museum for copyright and moral rights infringement

"Sharples notes that the legal case will not only focus on copyright, but also Wang’s moral rights, in particular the right to attribution—or the right to be named or identified as the author."

Tuesday, December 20, 2022

Some of Trump’s New NFTs Look Like Photoshops of Google Search Results; PetaPixel, December 16, 2022

JARON SCHNEIDER, PetaPixel; Some of Trump’s New NFTs Look Like Photoshops of Google Search Results

"After hyping a major announcement, Donald Trump revealed his next major project: NFTs. But reverse image searches of some of the “digital trading cards” revealed them to be edits of clothing easily found in Google search, raising copyright questions...

While these images aren’t what most would consider to be the height of photographic art, they are still photos that are presumably owned by a manufacturer and using images — even e-commerce photos — without permission in this manner brings up copyright questions: it may not be legal, not to mention unethical, to just take photos off web stores, turn them into “art,” and then sell them for $99 each.

Gizmodo says it reached out to the manufacturer of both pieces of clothing to ask if either granted the former U.S. President permission to use their images, but neither immediately responded." 

Wednesday, September 16, 2020

Nicki Minaj-Tracy Chapman copyright battle sets stage for future of music recording; Marketplace, September 14, 2020

Sabri Ben-Achour, Marketplace ; Nicki Minaj-Tracy Chapman copyright battle sets stage for future of music recording

"Tracy Chapman is suing Nicki Minaj for using part of one of her songs. The case has the potential to upend the way music is written and how artists borrow from one another.

Minaj’s song “Sorry” obviously takes from Chapman’s song “Baby Can I Hold You.”Nobody disputes that. Minaj and her people asked Chapman for permission during and after production of “Sorry,” and Chapman and her reps said no, multiple times. So Minaj didn’t release the song on her 2018 album.

“What complicates it in this case is that there was further redistribution,” said Eugene Volokh, a professor at UCLA School of Law."

Monday, December 3, 2018

Podcaster Sued for Copyright Infringement for Using Music without Permission - Remember ASCAP, BMI and SESAC Licenses Don’t Cover All the Rights Needed for Podcasting; Lexology, November 29, 2018

Wednesday, August 22, 2018

Copyright vs. Conscience: Lawyering Up Isn’t Always the Right Move; PetaPixel, August 21, 2018

Blair Bunting, PetaPixel; Copyright vs. Conscience: Lawyering Up Isn’t Always the Right Move

"You read stories about photographers going after copyright abuse all the time, and it’s nearly always justified. In this case, I hope you can agree with me that seeking monetary compensation through legal recourse was not the right move. Sometimes you have to step back and remember that this may be a business, but it’s a business that relies on people. Once in a while, you have to remember that everyone featured in a photograph is a human, and as such all deserve compassion.

Rest in peace, Old Man."

Tuesday, June 5, 2018

In Defense Of Fair Use; Intellectual Property Watch, June 4, 2018

Roy Kaufman, Managing Director, Business Development, Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), Intellectual Property Watch; In Defense Of Fair Use

"Copyright law, to be sustainable, calls for a balance. Under copyright law, creators receive exclusive rights to allow or prevent others from making copies of their works for a limited time as an incentive to create. Users receive benefits from the results of the creator’s labor, perhaps through watching, reading or listening to those results. Users may also benefit pursuant to a license to use the works in other ways. Eventually the works fall into the public domain, allowing further reuse by everyone

Recent litigation involving a graffiti artist and a purveyor of sportswear shows how sometimes a flexible mechanism for balancing the copyright entitlements of creators and users makes sense. In this case, clothier H&M used graffiti painted without authority in a public park as backdrop for an ad. The case, as reported in The New York Times, asks “Does a mural painted illegally in a public park in Williamsburg deserve the safeguards of federal copyright law?”"

Friday, May 25, 2018

Why Every Media Company Fears Richard Liebowitz; Slate, May 24, 2018

Justin Peters, Slate; Why Every Media Company Fears Richard Liebowitz

"Key to Liebowitz’s strategy is the pursuit of statutory damages. Under the Copyright Act of 1976, federal plaintiffs can be awarded statutory damages if they can prove “willful” infringement, a term that is not explicitly defined in the text of the bill. (“What is willful infringement? It’s what the courts say it is,” explained Adwar. Welcome to the wonderfully vague world of copyright law!) If a plaintiff had registered the work in question with the Copyright Office before the infringement occurred or up to three months after the work was initially published, then he or she can sue for statutory damages, which can be as high as $150,000 per work infringed. That’s a pretty hefty potential fine for the unauthorized use of a photograph that, if it had been licensed prior to use, might not have earned the photographer enough for a crosstown taxi.

“Photographers are basically small businesses. They’re little men. But you have this powerful tool, which is copyright law,” said Kim, the freelance photographer. The question that copyright attorneys, media executives, and federal judges have been asking themselves for 2½ years is this: Is Richard Liebowitz wielding that tool responsibly? “He offers [his clients] nirvana, basically. He essentially offers them: I will sue for you, I don’t care how innocuous the infringement, I don’t care how innocuous the photograph, I will bring that lawsuit for you and get you money,” said attorney Kenneth Norwick. And the law allows him to do it. So is Liebowitz gaming the system by filing hundreds of “strike suits” to compel quick settlements? Or is he an avenging angel for photographers who have seen their livelihoods fade in the internet age? “They can call Richard Liebowitz a troll,” said Kim. “Better to be a troll than a thief.”...

Over the past 2½ years, Liebowitz has attained boogeyman status in the C-suites of major media organizations around the country. Like the villain in a very boring horror movie featuring content management systems and starring bloggers, his unrelenting litigiousness has inspired great frustration amongst editors and media lawyers fearful that they will be the next to fall victim to the aggravating time-suck known as a Richard Liebowitz lawsuit. And he is probably all of the things his detractors say he is: a troll, an opportunist, a guy on the make taking advantage of the system. He is also a creature of the media industry’s own making, and the best way to stop him and his disciples is for media companies to stop using photographers’ pictures without paying for them—and to minimize the sorts of editorial mistakes borne out of ignorance of or indifference to federal copyright law. “People should realize—and hopefully will continue to realize,” said Liebowitz, “that photographers need to be respected and get paid for their work.”"

Sunday, November 20, 2016

Urban Outfitters settles with Navajo Nation after illegally using tribe's name; Guardian, 11/18/16

Nicky Woolf, Guardian; Urban Outfitters settles with Navajo Nation after illegally using tribe's name:
"Urban Outfitters reached a settlement with the Navajo Nation after illegally using the tribe’s name for a collection that included “Navajo hipster panties” and a “Navajo print flask”.
The lawsuit was brought against the fashion company in 2012, though it had used the name since 2001...
The tribe registered the name Navajo as a trademark in 1943, according to court documents."

Sunday, October 2, 2016

Library offers workshop ‘Copyright and Fair Use for Graduate Students’; University of Delaware, 9/28/16

UDaily Staff, University of Delaware; Library offers workshop ‘Copyright and Fair Use for Graduate Students’ :
"The University of Delaware Library is offering a Nov. 17 workshop on “Copyright and Fair Use for Graduate Students,” which will deal with the practical application of copyright law and its fair use provisions.
Considering copyright at the beginning of the research process will simplify the completion of the degree requirements for graduate students. Attendees will learn why and when copyright is important to scholars – researchers, writers and teachers – and these important skills:
• How to determine when permission is needed to use an excerpt or image;
• How to obtain permission; what to do when permission to use an image or excerpt cannot be obtained; and
• How to evaluate if fair use may be an appropriate defense for your use of material protected by copyright...
The workshop is available at no charge is open to University of Delaware faculty, staff and students."

Thursday, May 29, 2014

How does copyright work in space?; Economist, 5/22/13

G.F., Economist; How does copyright work in space? :
"CHRIS HADFIELD has captured the world's heart, judging by the 14m YouTube views of his free-fall rendition of David Bowie's "Space Oddity", recorded on the International Space Station (ISS). The Canadian astronaut's clear voice and capable guitar-playing were complemented by his facility in moving around in the microgravity of low-earth orbit. But when the man fell to Earth in a neat and safe descent a few days ago, after a five-month stay in orbit, should he have been greeted by copyright police? Commander Hadfield was only 250 miles (400 km) up, so he was still subject to terrestrial intellectual-property regimes, which would have applied even if he had flown the "100,000 miles" mentioned in the song's lyrics, or millions of kilometres to Mars. His five-minute video had the potential to create a tangled web of intellectual-property issues. How does copyright work in space?...
J.A.L. Sterling, a London-based expert on international copyright law, anticipated all this in a 2008 paper, "Space Copyright Law: the new dimension", in which he lists dozens more potentially problematic scenarios that could arise, some seemingly risible at first."

Wednesday, September 25, 2013

Intellectual Property Watch; Meeting Highlights Use Of Open Data In Science, Health And Sustainable Development, 9/18/13

Alessandro Marongiu, Intellectual Property Watch; Meeting Highlights Use Of Open Data In Science, Health And Sustainable Development: "At the end of a two-day conference in Switzerland, open knowledge experts emphasised the role of open data in strengthening science findings’ credibility, fostering medical research and enhancing sustainable development. The 2013 Open Knowledge Conference, an annual event organised by the Open Knowledge Foundation, aimed at understanding existing trends with a specific focus on open data use in new areas and sectors. The event was held in Geneva on 17-18 September... However, opening up scientific data may raise some concerns, particularly under the perspective of intellectual property rights. “As you access code and data, the role of copyright is not something to be ignored,” Victoria Stodden said. “US law says that original expressions of ideas fall under copyright by default. This is a barrier for me. To use a code I have to ask permission, it is actually not legal to just grab a code even if you put it on the web,” she added. She called on scientists to give up their IP rights for the sake of reproducibility and ask just for attribution when others use their data."

Wednesday, December 3, 2008

New Machines Reproduce Custom Books on Demand, Chronicle of Higher Education, 12/5/08 Issue

Via Chronicle of Higher Education: New Machines Reproduce Custom Books on Demand:

"If you wonder what the future of book publishing might look, smell, and sound like, head north to the University of Alberta's bookstore in Edmonton. There a $144,000 machine is churning out made-to-order paperbacks at a cost of a penny a page.

It's the Espresso Book Machine, which converts digital files into bound books, one order at a time, in under 15 minutes...

But the machine has limitations. It cannot print just any book. Copyright law limits the books that can be offered, the texts must be PDF's, and it can take days to get a repairman when something breaks...

In addition to the technical restrictions, however, U.S. copyright regulations require that books be in the public domain (which includes anything printed before 1922), or that the copyright holder must grant permission for reprinting. Canadian law offers more avenues for reproduction under copyright, which may explain why two Canadian universities — Alberta and McMaster University, in Ontario — are among the sites using the machine. Printers in Canada must pay a royalty fee of no more than $10 for each copy of an out-of-print book, Mr. Anderson says. The law requires books in print to carry a royalty of no more than 10.3 cents per page."

http://chronicle.com/free/v55/i15/15a00103.htm

Monday, November 10, 2008

Copyright code developed to guide teachers, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 11/10/08

Via Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: Copyright code developed to guide teachers

"Many educators, however, miss these opportunities because they don't know their rights under fair use, have been given bad information or lack administrators who will back them up, said a report last year by American and Temple universities. The report, "The Cost of Copyright Confusion for Media Literacy," found that many teachers were censoring themselves.

Now American and Temple universities and several national associations have combined to try to remove the teachers' reluctance to use various sources including print, video, audio and the Internet -- in their media literacy lessons.

At the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia tomorrow, they will release the "Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Media Literacy Education.""

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08315/926769-298.stm