OpEd: Editorial: Google Deal or Rip-Off?, Via Library Journal, 12/15/08

OpEd: Via Library Journal: Editorial: Google Deal or Rip-Off?:

"One public access terminal per public library building. Institutional database subscriptions for academic and public libraries that secure once freely available material in a contractual lockbox, which librarians already know too well from costly e-journal and e-reference database deals. No remote access for public libraries without approval from the publisher/author Book Rights Registry, set up to administer the program. And no copying or pasting from that institutional database, though you can print pages for a fee. Of course, you can always purchase the book, too.

Those are just a few of the choice tidbits from the 200-page settlement in the Association of American Publishers (AAP) and Authors Guild three-year-old suit against Google, drawn from Jonathan Band's “Guide for the Perplexed: Libraries and the Google Library Project Settlement.” Band's report was commissioned by the American Library Association and the Association of Research Libraries...

The restrictions were obviously too much for one of the original five Google partners, Harvard University Library (HUL), which criticized the settlement. Robert Darnton, the HUL director, said the deal had “too many potential limitations on access to and use of books” for academia and public libraries and questioned what the price for access would be, given that “the subscription service will have no real competitors.”"

http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6618842.html

Copyright extension is out of tune with reality, Financial Times.com, 12/17/08

Via Financial Times.com: Copyright extension is out of tune with reality:

"Copyright is an economic instrument, not a moral one, and if you consider the economic arguments – as I did two years ago at the request of Gordon Brown – you will find that they do not stack up. All the respectable research shows that copyright extension has high costs to the public and negligible benefits for the creative community.

Consumers find themselves paying more for old works or unable to access “orphan works” where copyright ownership is unclear...

There are issues here that demand policy intervention, but they have nothing to do with Mr Burnham’s pet project. They suggest a focus on the balance and flexibility of copyright, and on better enforcing the protection that already exists – not on extending a right largely derided by younger citizens...

There are two broader messages. First, to music companies: you have moved beyond trying to close the internet down as a distribution channel, but you have still not done enough to exploit the swirl of creative and commercial opportunities unleashed by the world of social networks and web 2.0. Please focus on innovation, not on trying to eke more rent from the successes of yesteryear."

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ba280756-ca07-11dd-93e5-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1

Creative Commons 6th Birthday Celebration, Public Knowledge, 12/16/08

Via Public Knowledge: Creative Commons 6th Birthday Celebration:

6:30-9:00pm, Tuesday, December 16th, 2008

Join D.C. Copynight for a Creative Commons 6th Birthday Celebration. Bring some CC-licensed media to share. There will be pizza, beer, CC media & swag, and good cheer—perhaps even great cheer.

Public Knowledge1875 Connecticut Ave. NWSuite 650Washington, DC 20009

RSVP at: http://cc6bdaydc.eventbrite.com/

http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/1907

Rhode Island Pub Owner Faces Suit Over Music Copyrights, New York Times, 12/14/08

Via New York Times: Rhode Island Pub Owner Faces Suit Over Music Copyrights:

"The bar’s owner, Patrick Griffin, is being sued by the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, or Ascap. The organization says the bar violated federal copyright law during the show and is seeking up to $120,000 in damages."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/14/us/14pub.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=copyright&st=cse

Pamela Samuelson on Copyright Reform, Bunsnip.com, 11/13/08

Via Bunsnip.com: Pamela Samuelson on Copyright Reform at Free Culture Conference, Berkeley 2008:

"I think one reason that it’s really important to think about copyright reform is because really pretty much every 40 years there has been copyright reform. So it’s time to really get that conversation started. And a lot of what we need to do is move to better principals about what a good copyright law would look like. It shouldn’t be as long – current copyright law is 200 pages long, 300 if you buy certain editions – and it’s too complicated. I can’t make my way through about half the provisions because they’re so incomprehensible. Maybe it was ok that copyright law was really abstruse at a time when the only people who needed to know anything about it were the industry lawyers who essentially were mediating these kind of inter-industry disputes. If they knew what it meant and nobody else did, who cared, as long as it just applied to them. But now that copyright law is really affecting and regulating our daily activities, we the people deserve a copyright law that’s simple, that’s fair, that’s balanced, and that gets us to a much better way of thinking about what good role copyright law can play.

Like some of the earlier speakers, I worry a lot about the implications of copyright for the activities that all of you do on a daily basis. There’s a really fun essay that was written by one of my colleagues in Copyright, John Tehranian, entitled, “Infringement Nation.” What John does in the article is go through the average day of a professor (seems to be modeled on himself)."

http://www.bunsnip.com/2008/11/free-culture-conference-2008-pamela.html

Lawrence Lessig to leave Stanford for Harvard Law School to direct Safra Center; Lessig Blog, 12/12/08

Lawrence Lessig via Lessig Blog: Lawrence Lessig to leave Stanford Law School for Harvard Law School to direct Safra Center:

"In November, the Provost of Harvard University invited me to become the director of the Safra Center. Last week, I accepted the offer. In the summer [2009], I will begin an appointment at the Harvard Law School, while directing the Safra Center."

http://lessig.org/blog/2008/12/required_reading_news_1.html

NewYorkMusicCopyrght.org: A Copyright Resource for New York Musicians

NewYorkMusicCopyrght.org: A Copyright Resource for New York Musicians:

http://nymusiccopyright.org/

Press Release from Public Knowledge, 10/27/08:

Public Knowledge today opened a new Web site dedicated to copyright issues as they affect musicians. The site, NYMusicCopyright.Org, is funded by a grant from the New York State Music Fund.

“This new site is dedicated to helping musicians understand a very complicated copyright landscape,” said Gigi B. Sohn, Public Knowledge president and co-founder.

On the site, users will find an introduction to copyright.

There are also sections on:

Music licensing
Sampling
Alternative methods of distribution
Remedies for copyright infringement
Device makers and infringement
Internet service providers and infringement
Peer-to-peer technologies
Digital rights management
Orphan works

“We hope musicians and those interested in the music industry will take advantage of this exciting new resource,” Sohn said."

http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/1810

New European online library to remain down until January, Sydney Morning Herald, 12/10/08

Via Sydney Morning Herald: New European online library to remain down until January:

"With 14 staff members and at an annual cost put at around 2.5 million euros (3.2 million US dollars), Europeana -- which can be found at www.europeana.eu -- has more humble beginnings, despite the massive interest.

The prototype which was launched, briefly, last month contains around two million digital items, all of them already in the public domain, as the most recent items are plagued by problems linked to copyright and their use online."

http://news.smh.com.au/technology/new-european-online-library-to-remain-down-until-january-20081210-6v42.html

Google adds magazines to online book archive, Sydney Morning Herald, 12/10/08

Via Sydney Morning Herald: Google adds magazines to online book archive:

"Google announced on Tuesday that it had begun adding magazines to its online archive of books in a partnership with publishers...

A search on books.google.com will now not only bring up links to relevant books but also to magazine articles related to the query. Users can also use advanced search on Google Book Search to search through magazines only...

In late October, Google settled a copyright dispute with the Association of American Publishers and the Authors Guild over the Internet giant's plans to scan millions of books."

http://news.smh.com.au/technology/google-adds-magazines-to-online-book-archive-20081210-6v91.html

Online Rebel Publishes Millions of Dollars in U.S. Court Records for Free, Wired.com, 12/12/08

Via Wired.com, Online Rebel Publishes Millions of Dollars in U.S. Court Records for Free:

"[Carl] Malamud is a man accustomed to finding ways to provide free and easy online access to government documents...

He's since won battles freeing the nation's catalog of copyrights, Oregon's book of state laws, and the U.S. Patent and Trademark database. Now, he's after congressional-hearing videos, expensive but copyright-free building codes, and the Code of Federal Regulations, in addition to all the court filings in the PACER database."

http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2008/12/open_pacer

Pantomime renames dwarfs to avoid breaching Disney copyright, Telegraph.co.uk, 12/04/08

Via Telegraph.co.uk: Pantomime renames dwarfs to avoid breaching Disney copyright, A Christmas pantomime has renamed the dwarfs in its production of Snow White, to avoid breaching Disney copyright:

"Doc, Dopey, Sleepy, Grumpy, Happy and Bashful have been ditched from the show at The Albert Halls theatre in Bolton, Greater Manchester.

Their roles have been taken by a crack team of dwarfs going by the names Goody, Loopy, Lazy, Growler, Noisy and Shabby.

But the seventh dwarf – Sneezy – has been allowed to keep his part, apparently because Disney failed to copyright his name."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/3547008/Pantomime-renames-dwarfs-to-avoid-breaching-Disney-copyright.html

Landgrab For Ownership Of Library Catalog Data, TechDirt.com, 12/10/08

Via TechDirt.com: Landgrab For Ownership Of Library Catalog Data:

"There's been an interesting (and somewhat troubling) behind the scenes fight going on concerning library catalog data over the past few months. The Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) is a nonprofit, made up of member libraries that basically tries to help facilitate access to information among libraries. That seems like a good thing. One of its offerings is WorldCat -- basically a big online catalog of library collections, so that it's easy for anyone to find books that are available at other libraries. This, obviously, seems quite useful, and many libraries agree and are a part of WorldCat. However, a month ago, OCLC announced new policies for WorldCat that effectively allowed OCLC to claim ownership over the records that any library put in its system -- and, upon doing so, limiting what libraries could do with that data (such as, say, giving it to competing cataloging services). "

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081208/1224123056.shtml

Culture Secretary suggests extending copyright term to 70 years, Music Week, 12/11/08

UK Cultural Secretary Andy Burnham, Via Music Week: Culture Secretary suggests extending copyright term to 70 years:

"The online revolution has changed all the rules and ever since we’ve been struggling to catch up. For creative talent like you, it’s a genuinely double-edged sword – liberating and democratising on the one side, allowing people to bypass the traditional gatekeepers to the creative system.

But on the other side, what the online revolution has done is promote a prevailing sense with the online generation that creativity is free to enjoy.

We enjoy a whole lot more choice and opportunity – which is good. And a lot of people enjoy all that for free – which is good for them but not for everyone –and not good for the long term prospects for new music and new ideas, and fresh talent coming through...

The big creative challenge now is to come up with the new ideas that keep people listening and which set a true and realistic value on talent. In short, we need to create a new business model that is fairer to everyone – music-buying public, performers, and those who have built up the industry."

http://www.musicweek.com/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=1036434&c=1

Tyler Perry wins suit over copyright infringement, Washington Post, 12/10/08

Via Washington Post: Tyler Perry wins suit over copyright infringement:

"A woman who accused actor-screenwriter Tyler Perry of stealing material from her play for his movie "Diary of a Mad Black Woman" lost her federal lawsuit against the entertainer on Tuesday.

Jurors in the East Texas town of Marshall found Donna West did not present evidence that supported her claim of copyright infringement."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/10/AR2008121000860.html?sub=AR

Coldplay deny plagiarism allegations, London Guardian, 12/10/08

Via London Guardian: Coldplay deny plagiarism allegations, Chris Martin says that any similarities between Viva La Vida and Joe Satriani's If I Could Fly are 'purely coincidental'. Oh yeah? Maybe he should listen to this YouTube mash-up:

"Coldplay have responded to Joe Satriani's allegations of copyright infringement, describing the similarities between theirs and the guitarist's work "entirely coincidental".

Satriani filed his suit less than a week ago, alleging that Coldplay's Viva La Vida borrows heavily from his six-and-a-half-minute guitar noodle, If I Could Fly. The 52-year-old guitar nerd claimed credit, damages, and "any and all profits from the song.""

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2008/dec/10/coldplay-deny-plagiarism-allegations

DRM-Free iTunes Seems Unlikely, Despite Report, Wired.com, 12/9/08

Via Wired.com: DRM-Free iTunes Seems Unlikely, Despite Report:

"French technology site ElectronLibre claims that Apple will remove DRM from every song in the iTunes store today. We're not so sure...

If ElectronLibre's information (translation) is accurate, the deadlock between Apple and the three largest record labels has broken, and Apple can finally start selling music from all the world's labels without its Fairplay copyright protection. That is an enormous "if," and the signs don't point to it."

http://blog.wired.com/business/2008/12/drm-free-itunes.html

Five easy steps to plug online music leaks, YahooNews.com, 12/7/08

Via YahooNews.com: Five easy steps to plug online music leaks:

"Recent new releases from rock bands Guns N' Roses, Metallica and AC/DC all found their way onto peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing networks before they reached the stores, proving that even the most closely guarded projects are vulnerable.

But it's not the end of the world. After angrily beating your head against the wall, there are several measures you can implement to mitigate the damage. Here are five recommendations not intended for artists or managers who deliberately leak their own material."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081207/en_nm/us_leaks

Tyler Perry takes the stand in copyright lawsuit, Washington Post, 12/4/08

Via Washington Post: Tyler Perry takes the stand in copyright lawsuit:

"Actor-screenwriter Tyler Perry testified in a copyright infringement lawsuit Wednesday that he did not steal material from a woman's play for his blockbuster movie "Diary of a Mad Black Woman."

Donna West is suing Perry in federal court, arguing that he lifted material from a script she wrote titled "Fantasy of a Black Woman," which was based primarily on her own experiences. She wants a jury to award her family all the profits made from Perry's 2005 film, which earned some $50 million.

Perry insisted that his screenplay is an original work, but under questioning by West's attorney, said he did not know whether anyone actually saw him write the script, The Marshall News Messenger reported for its Thursday editions.

Perry's attorney said his client doesn't have an original copy of his script because he sends all his work to the Library of Congress for a copyright. "

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/03/AR2008120300676.html?sub=AR

Laptop searches at border might get restricted, Wired.com, 12/8/08

Via Wired.com: Laptop searches at border might get restricted:

"Customs and Border Protection, part of the Department of Homeland Security, asserts that it has constitutional authority to conduct routine searches at the border - without suspicion of wrongdoing - to prevent dangerous people and property from entering the country. This authority, the government maintains, applies not only to suitcases and bags, but also to books, documents and other printed materials - as well as to electronic devices.

Such searches, the government notes, have uncovered everything from martyrdom videos and other violent jihadist materials to child pornography and stolen intellectual property...

While Homeland Security points out that these procedures predate the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, civil liberties groups have seen an uptick in complaints about border searches of electronic devices in the past two years, according to Shirin Sinnar, staff attorney at the Asian Law Caucus. In some cases, travelers suspected border agents were copying their files after taking their laptops and cell phones away for anywhere from a few minutes to a few weeks or longer.

Now Congress is getting involved. A handful of bills have been introduced that could pass next year.

One measure, sponsored by Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., chairman of the Constitution subcommittee, would require reasonable suspicion of illegal activity to search the contents of electronic devices carried by U.S. citizens and legal residents. It would also require probable cause and a warrant or court order to detain a device for more than 24 hours.

And it would prohibit profiling of travelers based on race, ethnicity, religion or national origin.
Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., is sponsoring a bill in the House that would also require suspicion to inspect electronic devices. Engel said he is not trying to impede legitimate searches to protect national security. But, he said, it is just as important to protect civil liberties."

http://news.wired.com/dynamic/stories/T/TEC_LAPTOP_SEARCHES?SITE=WIRE&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2008-12-08-07-08-40

Did Coldplay Plagiarize Guitarist Joe Satriani?, NPR, All Things Considered, 12/8/08

Via NPR, All Things Considered: Did Coldplay Plagiarize Guitarist Joe Satriani?:

"When [Guitarist Joe] Satriani tried to contact Coldplay and didn't hear back after several months, he filed a copyright-infringement lawsuit against the band last week...

This certainly isn't the first time two songs have sounded the same. The Chiffons waged a lengthy legal battle against The Beatles' George Harrison over the similarities between "My Sweet Lord" and The Chiffons' "He's So Fine." Harrison eventually admitted to "subconsciously copying" the song and paid the band royalties."

Read NPR story: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=97973449

Listen to NPR story: http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=97973449&m=97973425

RDR Drops Rowling Appeal; Has New Book, Publishers Weekly, 12/7/08

Via Publishers Weekly: RDR Drops Rowling Appeal; Has New Book:

"RDR publisher Roger Rapoport said the new book “has a new focus and purpose, mindful of the guidelines of the court.” The $24.95 trade paperback is set to be released January 12...

He emphasized that the new book, which features material from Vander Ark's original Web site www.hp-lexicon.org, new commentary and a blend of material, "followed the road map" the judge laid out in his opinion about how a companion to the Potter books may be published without infringing Rowling's copyright. "We did what the judge told us to do," Rapoport said."

http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6620114.html

Post by Georgia Harper to Digital Copyright Listserv, University of Maryland University College, re Publisher Restrictions on Linking, 12/5/08

Post by Georgia Harper [Scholarly Communications Advisor for the University of Texas at Austin Libraries and 2006-2008 Intellectual Property Scholar, University of Maryland University College, Center for Intellectual Property] to Digital Copyright Listserv, University of Maryland University College, re "Publisher restriction on linking":

"Lori: You asked, "Does this licensing agreement just side-step copyright law and guidelines? Can publishers really stop educational fair use in this way? I'd be very interested in outside reading on this topic, links to blogs, etc., and your comments.

Answers: Yes. Yes. Comment: You've stumbled upon the famous Harvard Business Review exception to everything. Contracts that are negotiated, which your institutional subscription to EBSCO was (by someone), allow the parties to agree to just about anything they want to, short of ax murdering (i.e., crimes and misdemeanors, civil wrongs, etc.). So there you have it. HBR wants separate permissions licenses (or a heftier share of the EBSCO dinero) for the uses that everyone expects they are paying for when they subscribe to EBSCO, so be it. Sign here (again, which someone at your institution did). Outside reading - Harvard's explanation that fails to address the basic question, "why do you think your stuff is worth so much more than everyone else's:"http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.caul.edu.au%2Fdatasets%2Fhbr2008course-use.pdf&ei=06M5SeCjKIyG8gSvyLzoBg&usg=AFQjCNG07SMjR2zJbtgtn-yvJ4j4cvY18Q&sig2=R9dps-NZjzjaAq0j8INM8A
I suppose the answer is, "well, it is worth more if people will pay more,right?" Right.

To learn more about how and under what circumstances licenses trump copyright rights and privileges, well, that's a huge topic. Google 'relationship contract law copyright' for starters. Several good links on the first page, enough to get you going."

Google and the libraries, International Herald Tribune, 12/5/08

OpEd: Via International Herald Tribune: Google and the libraries:

"In 2004, Google signed a deal with five major research libraries to digitize all the books in their collections. "Google's mission is to organize the world's information, and we're excited to be working with libraries to help make this mission a reality" proclaimed company cofounder Larry Page. It looked like an encouraging first step toward a world in which all knowledge was online, all the time.

Not everyone was so enthralled with this beatific vision of the Future According to Google.

Authors had the temerity to insist they be paid for their digitized content, which was going to be used to sell Google ads, or, down the road, be loaded into a possible Google Reader. The Authors Guild sued, and eventually settled with Google, resulting in a complicated agreement about royalty payments that awaits the approval of a judge.

Libraries excluded from the Google project wondered where they would fit in. The words "Free to All" are etched in stone above the Boston Public Library, but last I checked, those words do not appear on the fuselages of the Boeings and Gulfstreams owned by Google founders Page and Sergey Brin.

Google executives sound like they are doing the world an immense favor by digitizing books, rarely mentioning that they are in business to sell stuff, not give it away...

In a heated philippic, "Free Our Libraries!" posted on the Web site of the Boston Library Consortium, Richard Johnson, an adviser to the Association of Research Libraries, decries the "momentous, ill-considered shift...that threatens to limit the public rights in the collections assembled and maintained, often at public expense, in libraries around the globe."

"Companies are paying nothing for access to the crown jewels," Johnson writes. "We may awaken one day to find that our digital heritage has become private property rather than a public good."

Librarians of the world, unite! You have everything to lose: your books."

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/12/05/opinion/edbeam.php

Mattel wins permanent injunction vs MGA in Bratz case, Yahoo News, 12/4/08

Via Yahoo News: Mattel wins permanent injunction vs MGA in Bratz case:

"A federal judge in California on Wednesday ordered MGA Entertainment Inc to stop selling its popular Bratz dolls and banned it from using the Bratz name, finding that "hundreds" of Bratz products infringe on copyrights owned by rival toymaker Mattel Inc (MAT.N).

U.S. District Judge Stephen Larson also ordered MGA to recall all Bratz dolls from retailers and to destroy "specialized plates, molds and matrices" used to make the dolls, according to a permanent injunction issued late on Wednesday, but stayed until at least early next year.

The ruling appears to allow MGA and retailers to sell the Bratz dolls through the Christmas holiday season."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081204/bs_nm/us_mattel_bratz

Author Says ‘Harry Potter Lexicon’ Will Be Published, New York Times, 12/6/08

Via New York Times: Author Says ‘Harry Potter Lexicon’ Will Be Published:

"After months of litigation, a dispute between J.K. Rowling and the author and publisher of a Harry Potter encyclopedia has magically disappeared. On Friday, Steven Jan Vander Ark, the author of “The Harry Potter Lexicon,” a reference guide to Ms. Rowling’s best-selling boy-wizard novels, said that his book would be published on Jan. 12 after amending it to a judge’s specifications, the Associated Press reported."

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/05/author-says-harry-potter-lexicon-will-be-published/?scp=2&sq=rowling&st=cse

Will EU repeat US copyright error?, London Guardian, 12/6/08

By Cory Doctorow, Via London Guardian: Will EU repeat US copyright error?:

"As I type this, members of the European Parliament are preparing to repeat one of the worst mistakes in copyright history — enacting a European version of America's reviled Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998.

The EU version will tack 45 years onto the duration of copyright for existing and future sound recordings, making for a grand total of 95 years' worth of monopoly control for companies that produce recordings...

Giving additional copyright for existing works can't possibly create the incentive to make more works — you could give Elvis Presley a million years' worth of copyright on his 1955 recordings and he still won't record any more music...

The US extension of copyright has turned almost every work created in America's history into an "orphan" — a work whose copyright has not expired, but whose copyright holder has been lost to the mists of time.

The court in Eldred held that an astonishing 98% of works in copyright were orphaned...

Experts all agree: extending the copyright on existing works provides no benefit save a windfall to a small minority of already-wealthy artists and giant corporations (if your music is still commercially viable after 50 or 95 years, you're a billionaire like Paul McCartney, not a struggling artist — or you're the giant label that acquired the rights to one of the lucky few artists' works)."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/dec/06/cory-doctorow

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

Questions Raised About Google Library Project’s Impact On Knowledge Access, Intellectual Property Watch, 11/26/08

Via Intellectual Property Watch: Questions Raised About Google Library Project’s Impact On Knowledge Access:

"Fred von Lohmann, senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, recently raised concerns about Google’s new settlement with publishers allowing the search engine to continue borrowing millions of books from libraries and scanning them to make a digital library.

His remarks were made to an international library copyright event in Chisinau, Moldova on 13 November where he spoke on the subject of “copyright’s ever-expanding empire” addressing digital rights management (technologies for controlling copyrighted content), licences and the privatisation of public information.

The key concern is that the Google project, likely to go into effect in 2010, will be in the private sector, which has different implications than public libraries, which von Lohmann described...

The Google project was settled out of court, which may prevent the outcome from being a precedent, noted von Lohmann, who added, “I think it [the Google project] raises many questions that are going to be with libraries for many years.”"

http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=1332

Op-Ed: How to Publish Without Perishing, New York Times, 11/29/08

Op-Ed by James Gleick, via New York Times: How to Publish Without Perishing:

"Which brings us to the settlement agreement, pending court approval, in the class action suit Authors Guild v. Google. The suit was filed in September 2005 when Google embarked on an audacious program of copying onto its servers every book it could get its hands on...On its face this looked like a brazen assault on copyright, but Google argued that it should be protected as a new kind of “fair use” and went on scanning during two and a half years of secret negotiations (I was involved on the authors’ side)...

As a way through the impasse, the authors persuaded Google to do more than just scan the books for purposes of searching, but go further, by bringing them back to commercial life. Under the agreement these millions of out-of-print books return from limbo. Any money made from advertising or licensing fees will go partly to Google and mostly to the rights-holders. The agreement is nonexclusive: If competitors to Google want to get into the business, they can.

This means a new beginning — a vast trove of books restored to the marketplace. It also means that much of the book world is being upended before our eyes: the business of publishing, selling and distributing books; the role of libraries and bookstores; all uses of books for research, consultation, information storage; everything, in fact, but the plain act of reading a book from start to finish."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/30/opinion/30gleick.html

Review of Lawrence Lessig: Decriminalizing the Remix, Time, 10/17/08

Via Time: Review of Lawrence Lessig: Decriminalizing the Remix:

"In his latest book, the Stanford professor and Wired columnist rails against the nation's copyright laws — regulations he believes are futile, costly and culturally stifling. Citing "hybrid" economies like YouTube and Wikipedia (both of which rely on user-generated "remixes" of information, images and sound), Lessig argues in favor of what he calls a "Read/Write (RW)" culture — as opposed to "Read/Only (RO)" — that allows consumers to "create art as readily as they consume it."

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1851241,00.html

Woody Guthrie: Open Source Pioneer, Newsweek, 9/24/08

Via Newsweek: Woody Guthrie: Open Source Pioneer:

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thetroll/archive/2008/09/24/woody-guthrie-open-source-pioneer.aspx

Review of Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy by Lawrence Lessig, Newsweek, 11/21/08

Via Newsweek, Review of Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy by Lawrence Lessig:

"Stanford law prof Lessig is a veteran critic of America's copyright laws. He argues that corporate-inspired attempts to tightly regulate the use of words, ideas and images has produced a profit-driven perversion of the noble objective of protecting the rights of creators. In this latest offering, his zeal to convince the public that current intellectual-property rules are ruining our culture burns brighter than ever. Lessig charges the IP authoritarians and the media companies that sign their checks with crimes against both youth and art, and he offers his own approach to balancing the conflict between copyright and creativity."

http://www.newsweek.com/id/170128

Markets Declare Truce in Copyright Wars, Google concedes that information isn't free, Wall Street Journal, 11/17/08

Wall Street Journal: Markets Declare Truce in Copyright Wars, Google concedes that information isn't free:

"This shift by Google led Peter Osnos, founder of PublicAffairs books, to wonder if the book settlement could have lessons for other owners of content. "Google has now conceded, with a very large payment, that information is not free," Mr. Osnos wrote for the Century Foundation. "This leads to an obvious, critical question: Why aren't newspapers and news magazines demanding payment for use of their stories on Google and other search engines? Why are they not getting a significant slice of the advertising revenues generated by use of their stories via Google?"

Alas for the troubled news media industry, so much of its news is commoditized that people won't pay for it online. But as digital media mature, we'll see more redefinitions of legal concepts such as fair use. There will also be revisions of business practices regarding who gets paid what by whom. The Google settlement is a reminder that owners of intellectual property can choose to lock it away, give it away, or, most sensibly, share it in exchange for reasonable compensation.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122688619008032339.html

Porn bill for couple who can't download, London Guardian, 11/29/08

Via London Guardian [Caution, some graphic language in linked article]: Porn bill for couple who can't download, Innocent people are getting letters from lawyers claiming they should pay for films they've never seen:

"He questions the amount demanded and methods used to identify computers alleged to have downloaded material. He believes the sum demanded is out of all proportion to the alleged injury. "In one case, Davenport Lyons wanted £500 for a £20 game. The alleged file-sharing would have cost only about £50 - the rest is legal costs.""

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2008/nov/28/internet-porn-bill-mistake

Seuss lawyers stop holiday Who-ville in Louisville, USA Today, 11/25/08

Via USA Today: Seuss lawyers stop holiday Who-ville in Louisville:

"There will be no Who-ville in Louisville this Christmas.

The city of Louisville is scrapping plans to use the iconic Dr. Seuss village and characters as part of its annual Christmas display after receiving a cease and desist letter from Dr. Seuss Enterprises.

"It appears these lawyers' hearts are two sizes too small," Louisville Mayor Jerry Abramson said...

But the cease-and-desist letter from the law firm DLA Piper, which represents Dr. Seuss Enterprises, said the "Who-ville" name and image, as well as the Grinch, are copyrighted and cannot be used without permission."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/offbeat/2008-11-25-seuss-louisville_N.htm

Copyright claim to university's name `baffling', Toronto Star, 11/20/08

Via Toronto Star: Copyright claim to university's name `baffling', Councillor for Oshawa, Durham, has threatened newspapers over technology school:

"Just as the University of Ontario Institute of Technology in Oshawa looks for a new name, a city councillor claims he owns the current one.

Robert Lutczyk, who sits on both the Oshawa and Durham Region councils, registered a copyright for "University of Ontario Institute of Technology" in 2005 and has recently forbidden several newspapers from printing the phrase under threat of legal action.

He's also registered "Medical School in Oshawa" and "Medical School at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology," neither of which exist...

Intellectual property lawyer Ziad Katul said the university itself has registered a trademark with UOIT and a slogan, which it owns. Lutczyk's copyright does not prevent the school, or the media, from using the name, he said."

http://www.thestar.com/article/540168

Jonathan Yardley on 'The Man Who Invented Christmas', Washington Post, 11/30/08

Via Washington Post: Jonathan Yardley on 'The Man Who Invented Christmas', Dickens was facing financial ruin when he imagined Ebenezer Scrooge:

"In the United States pirated editions of the book were quickly issued, including one from the ostensibly reputable Harper and Brothers, which infuriated Dickens, a passionate advocate of international copyright. A bogus edition appeared in England as well, but there he won his legal case against the offending opportunist. There also were dozens of unauthorized stage adaptations, but by and large he was less concerned about them. The practice was widespread, and the dramatizations provided free publicity for the book."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/26/AR2008112603425.html

Cinema 'cops' deploy night vision devices, Sydney Morning Herald, 11/26/08

Via Sydney Morning Herald: Cinema 'cops' deploy night vision devices:

"In response to an increase in pirated movie recordings coming out of Australia, the copyright police are patrolling cinemas with night vision devices - and it's not just commercial pirates they're after.

Movie studios are providing the scopes to cinema ushers across the country and training them in how to spot people illegally taping films using camcorders and even mobile phones."

http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/biztech/cinema-cops-deploy-night-vision-devices/2008/11/26/1227491597572.html

Is a picture really worth £1,000?, London Guardian, 11/27/08

Via London Guardian: Is a picture really worth £1,000?
A church and small businesses are just some of those accusing picture agencies of using heavy-handed tactics when pursuing payment:

"Dozens of small businesses and charities tell similar stories. On the online forums run by the Federation of Small Businesses, copyright infringement blows away every other subject. Many of those posting on the federation's forum have tried to do everything right; they aren't arguing about copyright. It's the enforcement tactics they find objectionable...

In the UK they'd struggle to make these amounts stick," he says. "UK law is only concerned with restoring the situation had licensing been correctly obtained. The courts don't like to be used as a means of extortion."

Drake says: "I understand the difficulty companies like Getty have and photographers have - they have a product that needs to be protected. But where is the Getty publicity campaign? Why aren't they issuing press releases and education to remind people that these images are not to be used?"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/nov/27/internet-photography

Judge says BU can't turn over infringers' IPs in P2P case, ARS Technica, 11/26/08

Via ARS Technica: Judge says BU can't turn over infringers' IPs in P2P case:

"The music industry's requests for more personal information regarding the identity of several accused file-sharers have been shot down by a federal judge. Judge Nancy Gertner quashed a subpoena this week in the infamous London-Sire v. Does 1-4 case, saying that the IP addresses of three anonymous Boston University students could not be handed over because the university had "adequately demonstrated that it is not able to identify the alleged infringers with a reasonable degree of technical certainty."

The legal system has been chipping away at the London-Sire case all year, starting this spring when Judge Gertner said that making files available on a P2P network does not equal copyright infringement."

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081126-judge-says-bu-cant-turn-over-infringers-ips-in-p2p-case.html

Once More, With Feeling: Copyright Is Not A Welfare System For Musicians, TechDirt, 11/26/08

Via TechDirt: Once More, With Feeling: Copyright Is Not A Welfare System For Musicians:

"Performance rights in the UK only last 50 years, so music performed in the 60s has started to move into the public domain, and some musicians are freaking out...

First of all, copyright was never intended to be a welfare system. Studio musicians knew the terms of the deal, and if they chose to rely on earnings from a single performance in 1958 for 50 years, it's difficult to see why the government should bail them out for their own short-sighted thinking, and their decision to live off of a single performance for all those years...

But, of course, that won't stop the propaganda fueled by the record labels who stand to make a nice, totally unearned, profit from an extension. They've put together a video of these "poor studio musicians" begging the government for a handout...

The UK government should reject this blatant and unfair renegotiation of terms, and tell the musicians if they want to ask someone for a handout, why not turn to the record labels who apparently didn't pay them enough in the first place."

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081126/0807212958.shtml

EU bashes DRM, won't support "three strikes" rules, ARS Technica, 11/24/08

Via ARS Technica: EU bashes DRM, won't support "three strikes" rules:

"Try as they might, the French simply cannot seem to get the rest of the EU to go along with their favored measure for handling Internet piracy. The French, responding to requests from the content industry, have decided that illicit file-swapping demands a "graduated response," a euphemism for a three-strikes approach that would ultimately see ISPs cut off the Internet access of repeat pirates. The rest of Europe remains largely uncomfortable with this approach, and has managed to keep graduated response out of the EU's formal conclusions for dealing with online content and cultural material."

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081124-eu-bashes-drm-wont-support-three-strikes-rules.html

Film studios to become 'police, judge, executioner', Sydney Morning Herald, 11/24/08

Via Sydney Morning Herald: Film studios to become 'police, judge, executioner':

"ISPs argue that, like Australia Post with letters, they are just providing a service and should not be forced to become copyright police.

Conversely, the TV and movie industry want ISPs to disconnect people it has identified as repeat infringers. There would be no involvement from police or the courts and the industry would simply provide the IP addresses of users they believe to be illegal downloaders.

"To shift the burden of proof and require that ISPs terminate access to users upon mere allegations of infringement would be incredibly harmful to individual internet users in Australia," the online users lobby group Electronic Frontiers Australia said.

"Every citizen has a right of due process under the law and, when faced with having their internet service terminated, every citizen has the right to ask that the case against them be proven first.""

http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/biztech/film-studios-to-become-police-judge-executioner/2008/11/24/1227491443731.html

Now for something completely different, London Guardian, 11/24/08

Via London Guardian: Now for something completely different -- Sick of losing revenue to illegally uploaded videos, the Monty Python team are among those signing up for YouTube's new ID initiative:

"For three years you YouTubers have been ripping us off, taking tens of thousands of our videos and putting them up on YouTube." So begins one of the current hottest viral videos. It stars the Monty Python team, and explains why they have decided to stop attempts to remove the illegally uploaded videos on YouTube - and have instead signed up to the site's Video ID system, which identifies rights holders' material and allows them to choose to have it either removed from the site, or have adverts attached to it...

The Pythons have decided on the second option."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/nov/24/googlethemedia-digitalmedia

All-Star Witness List In Lawsuit Over Constitutionality Of RIAA Lawsuits, TechDirt, 11/20/08

Via TechDirt: All-Star Witness List In Lawsuit Over Constitutionality Of RIAA Lawsuits:

"The list includes:

John Perry Barlow (former songwriter for The Grateful Dead, founder of the EFF, and well known digital thinker)
Prof. Johan Pouwelse (technical and scientific director of European research project P2P-Next)
Prof. Lawrence Lessig (needs no introduction, I imagine, for folks around here)
Matthew Oppenheim (who has a somewhat murky relationship with the RIAA, at times representing the RIAA, and at other times insisting he does not represent the RIAA)
Prof. Terry Fisher (a director of Harvard's Berkman Center and author of Promises to Keep, an early book looking at how the internet was changing the entertainment industry, and how it's business models need to change)
Prof. Wendy Seltzer (well known copyfighter, law professor, former staff attorney at the EFF and founder of the Chilling Effects site)
Prof. John Palfrey (Harvard law professor, co-director of the Berkman Center, author of Born Digital)
Prof. Jonathan Zittrain (Harvard and Oxford law professor, co-director of the Berkman Center, author of The Future of the Internet)
Andrew Grant (former antipiracy specialist at DRM company Macrovision)"

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081120/1244282904.shtml

McCain Responds To Jackson Browne Lawsuit: Here's How Fair Use Works, TechDirt, 11/21/08

Via TechDirt: McCain Responds To Jackson Browne Lawsuit: Here's How Fair Use Works:

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081121/0203022910.shtml

Legal Jujitsu in a File-Sharing Copyright Case, New York Times, 11/18/08

Via New York Times: Legal Jujitsu in a File-Sharing Copyright Case:

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/18/legal-jujitsu-in-a-file-sharing-copyright-case/?scp=1&sq=copyright&st=cse

Q & A: Making Use of Public Domain, New York Times, 11/19/08

Via New York Times: Q & A: Making Use of Public Domain:

"Q. What does it mean when a Web site says a picture or document is in the public domain? Does that mean I can use it for my own purposes?"...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/20/technology/personaltech/20askk-001.html?scp=2&sq=copyright&st=cse

Google book search deal is good news for copyright law, London Times, 11/19/08

Via London Times: Google book search deal is good news for copyright law, The search giant's settlement with publishers could be a game-changing legal event, says the MP for Intellectual Property:

"Many US libraries are intending to make out of print material available to Google on this basis. The impact on access to such works in the US is likely to be significant, enabling consumers to access works they previously would have struggled to find.

The effect of this agreement will in the most part be limited to the US. And yet the announcement is of interest to users of the copyright system worldwide. Why? Because this is an agreement that, if it works as it should, will strike a middle ground between the need for public access to works and the right of authors and publishers to control and be paid for the use of their creations.

The result, if it works, will be an evolution in the way copyright licensing for printed works is administered and a revolution in the freedom of access to harder-to-find works — all within a system that will remunerate rights holders fairly and give them control over the use of their works. "

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article5187385.ece

Billion Dollar Charlie vs. the RIAA, Boston Globe, 11/18/08

Via Boston Globe: Billion Dollar Charlie vs. the RIAA:

"[Charles] Nesson and his [Harvard Law School] students have decided to "litigate in the court of public opinion," as well as in the courtroom, and they are putting on quite a show. Legally, they are arguing that the RIAA is using civil litigation to punish alleged criminal activity, which they say violates the Constitution. Moreover, Nesson et al have posted all manner of fascinating materials at the CyberOne website of Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society."

http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/articles/2008/11/18/billion_dollar_charlie_vs_the_riaa/