Study: Lawsuits Down, But Non-Practicing Entities Buying Patents At 'Steady Rate'; Forbes, 4/21/16

Michael Carroll, Forbes; Study: Lawsuits Down, But Non-Practicing Entities Buying Patents At 'Steady Rate' :

"The amount of patent-infringement litigation took a noticeable dip in the first quarter of this year compared to the same time period in previous years, but whether the numbers reflect a true downturn rather than a temporary hiccup remains to be seen – especially considering prospective plaintiffs are still amassing patents at their normal rate.

That’s the conclusion of an analysis of patent litigation volume reported by RPX Corp., a patent aggregator that helps clients manage and mitigate risks associated with patent-infringement lawsuits.

The company tracks litigation by non-practicing entities, or NPEs – those who hold patents and launch patent-infringement lawsuits against people or companies for allegedly using or profiting from an element of the patents the NPE holds. As a rule, NPEs obtain patents for products but don’t develop or market them.

Some refer to NPEs as “patent trolls.” RPX has spent more than $2 billion to acquire more than 15,000 patents in order to help companies avoid litigation. They both purchase patents before they can be obtained by non-practicing entities that will target their clients with lawsuits and obtain patents from NPEs after a lawsuit has been filed."

Google Case Ends, but Copyright Fight Goes On; Publishers Weekly, 4/22/16

Andrew Albanese, Publishers Weekly; Google Case Ends, but Copyright Fight Goes On:

"In a statement, Authors Guild officials called the Supreme Court’s denial a “colossal loss” for authors and bemoaned the “expansion of fair use” in the digital age. Executive director Mary Rasenberger suggested that the courts in the Google case were “blinded” by the “public-benefit arguments.” And Authors Guild president Roxana Robinson added that the Supreme Court’s denial was “further proof that we’re witnessing a vast redistribution of wealth from the creative sector to the tech sector.”

Others, however, including public advocacy group Public KnowIedge hailed the end of the litigation. “The Supreme Court’s decision to let the Second Circuit’s ruling stand reflects what we have long said, that fair use is a powerful and flexible doctrine that enables not only new works, but also innovative uses of existing works," said Raza Panjwani, Policy Counsel at Public Knowledge. "This denial will hopefully lead to new efforts to expand our access to culture and knowledge through digital formats.”

Jonathan Band, an attorney for the library community agrees. "I don't know if anyone else will create another search database for books," he told PW, "but others will create search databases for other sorts of materials, to the benefit of public and the copyright owners."

But that theme—that the courts are enabling the tech sector to unfairly build its value off the backs of creators—has become an animating principle in a copyright policy fight that is slowly beginning to take shape. And while the Google case may have ended in the courts, the copyright fight in the policy arena is likely just getting started...

“I think it hurts them,” [Grimmelmann] said. “The way they lost this case, by litigating this through to four resounding fair-use decisions, the last of which was written by Pierre Leval [considered the nation’s foremost jurist on fair use], it’s hard to imagine any way to lay down stronger bricks for fair use than that.”"

Librarian of Congress Nominee Carla Hayden Confirmation Hearing; C-SPAN, 4/20/16

C-SPAN; Librarian of Congress Nominee Carla Hayden Confirmation Hearing:

"Librarian of Congress Nominee Carla Hayden Confirmation Hearing: Carla Hayden, President Obama’s nominee to be the next librarian of Congress, testified at her confirmation hearing. Many questions Ms. Hayden answered concerned the Library of Congress’s functions, including its copyright office, and what challenges she sees ahead for the institution. Maryland Senators Barb Mikulski and Ben Cardin and former Maryland Senator Paul Sarbanes testified in support of her nomination."

Why U Can’t Find Prince’s Music Online; Slate, 4/21/16

Dan Kois, Slate; Why U Can’t Find Prince’s Music Online:

"The singer/songwriter/multi-instrumentalist/genius had a famously fraught relationship with distributive technology: He embraced it in disseminating his music, as long as he maintained control over his own work. But he battled for decades with his record company, subverted traditional channels of distribution, and even last year removed his catalog from nearly every streaming service. And he was fervent in defending his copyright against exploitation, to a degree that seemed, at times, excessive, including issuing takedown notices to Vine users, threatening fan-site operators for running his photo, and filing a DMCA complaint against a mom who posted a video of her kids dancing to “Let’s Go Crazy.” (That case made it to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in September.)

The practical result of all this is that, through Prince’s own efforts and expressed wishes, the standard methods of mourning a great artist are a little bit cockeyed this afternoon. Sure, everyone is digging up whatever remarkable videos they can—we’re on it—but nearly all his fantastic live performances, his surprising covers, his leaked material are nowhere to be found on my Twitter feed and Facebook news feed. And while I’d love nothing more than to stream Prince on Spotify right now, he’s not there."

The Prince of Copyright Enforcement; Wall Street Journal, 4/21/16

Jacob Gershman, Wall Street Journal; The Prince of Copyright Enforcement:

"The pop music world suffered a huge loss on Thursday with the sudden death of Prince, who will be long remembered as one of the industry’s most innovative and influential stars.

But in the legal arena, “the artist formerly known as Prince” was known as perhaps the recording industry’s most tenacious defender of copyright protections.

The artist and music companies representing him pushed the boundaries of copyright law with disputes that set legal precedents and polarized fans.

It was just last year when a federal appeals court in California ruled in the famous “dancing baby” case that centered on a 29-second home video of a baby dancing to the Prince song “Let’s Go Crazy.” The court ruled against Universal Music Corp., which enforced Prince’s copyrights, concluding that the company failed to consider whether the content in the video qualifies as fair use before trying to scrub the Internet of it."

Challenge to Google Books Is Declined by Supreme Court; New York Times, 4/18/16

Adam Liptak, New York Times; Challenge to Google Books Is Declined by Supreme Court:

"The Supreme Court on Monday refused to revive a challenge to Google’s digital library of millions of books, turning down an appeal from authors who said the project amounted to copyright infringement on a mass scale.

The Supreme Court’s brief order left in place an appeals court decision that the project was a “fair use” of the authors’ work, ending a legal saga that had lasted more than a decade...

As is their custom, the justices gave no reasons for declining to hear the case, Authors Guild v. Google Inc., No. 15-849.

Last year, a unanimous three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said that Google’s project was lawful and beneficial.

“The purpose of the copying is highly transformative, the public display of text is limited and the revelations do not provide a significant market substitute for the protected aspects of the originals,” Judge Pierre N. Leval, an authority on copyright law, wrote for the panel."

Obama’s Secrecy Problem; Slate, 4/15/16

Fred Kaplan, Slate; Obama’s Secrecy Problem:

"Steven Aftergood, director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists, told me Thursday, “This is a time of particularly promising ferment over secrecy policy. There is a recognition, even within the national-security apparatus, that the classification system has overreached and needs to be pruned back.” Yet by all measures, the bureaucracies persist in resisting this pruning, Congress won’t allocate the money for the shears, and the president hasn’t mustered the full attention and commitment that the task requires. Information may want to be free, but Washington has it wrapped in a tangle."

Artist Says Brazilian Protesters Copied His Giant Rubber Duck; New York Times, 4/1/16

Christopher Merle, New York Times; Artist Says Brazilian Protesters Copied His Giant Rubber Duck:

"The duck used in the demonstrations has X’s in place of its eyes and a Portuguese slogan across its chest that says: “We won’t pay for what is not our fault anymore.” But representatives for the Dutch artist, Florentijn Hofman, who is known for his outsize creations depicting animals, say they saw too many similarities between his rubber duck and the one used in Brazil — and they are not amused...

A spokeswoman for Mr. Hofman, Kim Engbers, said in an email: “Of course we want to emphasize that it is a shame that this parody is used for propaganda. Our project is meant to be nonpolitical.”

She added: “It is a positive work and has healing functions.”

Ms. Engbers, however, stopped short of calling the Brazilians’ use of the rubber duck a copyright infringement."

Lifting the Patent Barrier to New Drugs and Energy Sources; New York Times, 4/12/16

Eduardo Porter, New York Times; Lifting the Patent Barrier to New Drugs and Energy Sources:

"Malaria has preyed on humans for centuries. Hundreds of thousands of children die each year from the disease. Considering the market’s size, why haven’t pharmaceutical companies rushed to develop a vaccine against the deadly parasite that causes it?

The answer is easy: There is no money to be made from a vaccine for poor children who could not possibly pay for inoculation.

Last year, GlaxoSmithKline finally introduced the world’s first malaria vaccine for large pilot tests among African children. The move, however, is not an endorsement of the profit motive as a spur for innovation. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation picked up much of the tab. And Glaxo does not expect to make money on its investment.

The lack of interest of the pharmaceutical industry, which generates huge profits protected by a web of patents enforced around the world, raises an important question.

Do we need a different way to spur innovation and disseminate new technologies quickly around the world? Are patents, which reward inventors by providing them with a government-guaranteed monopoly over their inventions for many years, the best way to encourage new inventions?"

‘We Shall Overcome’ Copyright May Be Overcome One Day; New York Times, 4/12/16

Ben Sisario, New York Times; ‘We Shall Overcome’ Copyright May Be Overcome One Day:

"Last year, a federal judge ruled that the long-claimed copyright to the song “Happy Birthday to You” was invalid. Now the same could happen for another iconic tune: “We Shall Overcome.”

On Tuesday, the We Shall Overcome Foundation, a nonprofit group that works with orphans and the poor, sued the music publishers who control “We Shall Overcome,” seeking a declaratory judgment that the song is not under copyright and is in the public domain.

The case, which was filed at Federal District Court in Manhattan and seeks class-action status, also asks for the return of an unspecified amount of licensing fees that the publishers, the Richmond Organization and Ludlow Music, have collected from the use of the song.

Like the “Happy Birthday” case, the “We Shall Overcome” suit tracks a famous piece of music through a murky early history and a complex paper trail of copyright registrations."

Making the Most of Clinical Trial Data; New York Times, 4/12/16

Editorial Board, New York Times; Making the Most of Clinical Trial Data:

"Some researchers may oppose sharing data they have worked hard to gather, or worry that others will analyze it incorrectly. Creating opportunities for collaboration on subsequent analysis may help alleviate these concerns.

Of course, any data sharing must take patients’ privacy into account; patients must be informed before joining a clinical trial that their data may be shared and researchers must ensure that the data cannot be used to identify individuals.

By making data available and supporting analysis, foundations, research institutions and drug companies can increase the benefit of clinical trials and pave the way for new findings that could help patients."

Led Zeppelin members face trial in ‘Stairway to Heaven’ copyright infringement lawsuit; Washington Post, 4/12/16

Justin Wm. Moyer, Washington Post; Led Zeppelin members face trial in ‘Stairway to Heaven’ copyright infringement lawsuit:

"Led Zeppelin’s “Stairway to Heaven” has faced a lot of accusations in the 45 years since it was released. It’s overplayed, some say, particularly at high volumes by dudes trying to impress other dudes at guitar shops. It’s overlong, say others. And, for years, people have said “Stairway” sounds a lot like “Taurus” — a song by a much less famous band called Spirit who performed it allegedly while sharing bills with Zeppelin in the late 1960s. (You can listen for yourself here.)

But after decades of gossip, members of Led Zeppelin — specifically, singer Robert Plant and guitarist Jimmy Page, the writers of “Stairway” — will face a jury trial on May 10. The question: Did they copy at least some parts of their most famous song?"

Obama claimed to want transparency. His actions suggest the opposite; Guardian, 3/9/16

Trevor Timm, Guardian; Obama claimed to want transparency. His actions suggest the opposite:

"The Obama administration has taken a lot of well-deserved criticism over the years for claiming to be the most transparent presidency ever while actually being remarkably opaque, but they’ve now reached a new low: newly released documents show they aggressively lobbied Congress to kill bipartisan transparency reform that was based on the administration’s own policy.

In a move open government advocates are calling “ludicrous”, the administration “strongly opposed” the passage of bipartisan Freedom of Information Act (Foia) reform behind closed doors in 2014. The bill was a modest and uncontroversial piece of legislation which attempted to modernize the law for the internet age and codify President Obama’s 2009 memo directing federal agencies to adopt a “presumption of openness”.

Through a Foia lawsuit, the Freedom of the Press Foundation (the organization I work for) obtained a six-page talking points memo that the Justice Department distributed to House members protesting virtually every aspect of the proposed legislation in incredibly harsh language – despite the fact that some of the provisions were based almost word-for-word on the Justice Department’s own supposed policy (you can see a side-by-side comparison here).

Worse, Vice’s Jason Leopold is also reporting that the administration is conducting similar lobbying efforts around this year’s attempt to reform Foia in time for the law’s 50th anniversary this summer.

This is a shameful move by an administration that is constantly touting its open government and transparency bona fides despite a mountain of evidence to the contrary."

(Legal) Moonshiner and University Battle Over Rights to ‘Kentucky’; New York Times, 4/9/16

Sheryl Gay Stolberg, New York Times; (Legal) Moonshiner and University Battle Over Rights to ‘Kentucky’ :

"Mr. Fultz also tried to trademark his business name: Kentucky Mist Moonshine. And that, sports lovers, is how a moonshine maker wound up suing the University of Kentucky — the basketball behemoth exalted by its “Big Blue Nation” of fans — in federal court over a fundamental question: Who owns the rights to the name of the state?

The university says it does; it wants to block Mr. Fultz from trademarking “Kentucky Mist Moonshine” for T-shirts, hats and other apparel (though not his moonshine) sold in his distillery gift shop. It registered the word “Kentucky” with the United States Patent and Trademark Office for clothing in 1997, 19 years ago...

University athletic departments around the nation have grown increasingly aggressive about defending what they see as their intellectual property; in 2006, the University of Alabama sued an artist who painted football scenes, asking a federal judge to bar him from using the school’s “famous crimson and white color scheme.”

And while a number of public universities, in places like Georgia, Michigan and Ohio, also own rights to their state names, several experts in patent and trademark law predict Mr. Fultz — who is already selling T-shirts in the gift shop — will get his trademark in the end."

Digital Rights Groups: DMCA Reform Should Target Takedown Abuse, Errors; Intellectual Property Watch, 4/3/16

William New, Intellectual Property Watch; Digital Rights Groups: DMCA Reform Should Target Takedown Abuse, Errors:

"EFF’s written comments were filed as part of a series of studies on the effectiveness of the DMCA, begun by the Copyright Office this year. This round of public comments focuses on Section 512, which provides a notice-and-takedown process for addressing online copyright infringement, as well as “safe harbors” for Internet services that comply.

“One of the central questions of the study is whether the safe harbors are working as intended, and the answer is largely yes,” said EFF Legal Director Corynne McSherry. “The safe harbors were supposed to give rightsholders streamlined tools to police infringement, and give service providers clear rules so they could avoid liability for the potentially infringing acts of their users. Without those safe harbors, the Internet as we know it simply wouldn’t exist, and our ability to create, innovate, and share ideas would suffer.”

As EFF also notes in its comments, however, the notice-and-takedown process is often abused. A recent report found that the notice-and-takedown system is riddled with errors, misuse, and overreach, leaving much legal and legitimate content offline. EFF’s comments describe numerous examples of bad takedowns, including many that seemed based on automated content filters employed by the major online content sharing services."

The most important Obama nominee no one’s talking about; Washington Post, 3/25/16

Robert Gebelhoff, Washington Post; The most important Obama nominee no one’s talking about:

"Meanwhile, the Copyright Office — which plays a major role in the digital economy by administering copyright law and protecting intellectual property — has been designing a plan to leave the nest and become an independent agency.

Register of Copyrights Maria Pallante has openly advocated for the move, citing “operational tensions.” She argues that the library performs a legislative role as the research branch of Congress (through the Congressional Research Service), which she sees as at odds with the executive mission of the Copyright Office. Others have suggested that the Copyright Office be relocated to the Commerce Department as a sister agency to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. For some commentators, such proposals translate to the Copyright Office focusing more on the interests of the “Big Content” industry — including publishers, the recording industry and movie producers — than delivering copyright law itself."

Wikimedia’s art database violates copyright law, rules Sweden’s highest court; Ars Technica.com, 4/5/16

Glyn Moody, Ars Technica; Wikimedia’s art database violates copyright law, rules Sweden’s highest court:

"The Wikimedia Foundation said the judgment eroded "the freedom of panorama that is a fundamental part of freedom of expression, freedom of information, and artistic expression."

As Ars has reported, EU copyright is currently being updated, and one of the proposals of the European Parliament is for freedom of panorama to be enshrined in EU law. Referring to the Swedish court's ruling against Wikimedia Sverige, the author of the European Parliament's report on the proposed copyright reform, Pirate Party MEP Julia Reda, tweeted on Monday: "This is why we need EU-wide #FreedomofPanorama!""

Beyoncé sues Texas company over clothing with 'Feyoncé' label; Guardian, 4/5/16

Ciara McCarthy and Agencies, Guardian; Beyoncé sues Texas company over clothing with 'Feyoncé' label:

"Beyoncé is suing a Texas company to stop it from selling clothing and other items bearing the word “Feyoncé”, which she says is too close to her own trademarked name.

In a complaint filed in Manhattan federal court, Beyoncé accused Feyoncé Inc and three individuals, all from San Antonio, of “brazenly” selling infringing “Feyoncé” merchandise on their website.

The site sells shirts, sweatshirts and coffee mugs bearing the word. The singer said the Feyoncé knockoffs confuse consumers and cause her irreparable harm, and that the defendants have ignored her requests to stop. The singer previously threatened legal action against Etsy over a line of coffee mugs also bearing the word “Feyoncé”."

GSK Eases IP Rights For Poorest Countries, Considers Patent Pooling For Cancer; Intellectual Property Watch, 3/31/16

Catherine Saez, Intellectual Property Watch; GSK Eases IP Rights For Poorest Countries, Considers Patent Pooling For Cancer:

"The global medicines manufacturer said it wishes to widen access to its innovative new medicines around the world. The company, which already set tiered pricing, data-sharing, and “innovative partnerships,” said it recognises that improved access “requires a flexible and multi-faceted approach to intellectual property (IP) protection,” according to a press release.

GSK is evolving its graduated approach to filing and enforcing patents so that IP protection reflects a country’s economic maturity, said the release.

“For Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Low Income Countries (LICs), GSK will not file patents for its medicines, so as to give clarity and confidence to generic companies seeking to manufacture and supply generic versions of GSK medicines in those countries.”

“For Lower Middle Income Countries (LMICs) generally, GSK will file for patents but will seek to offer and agree licences to allow supplies of generic versions of its medicines for 10 years.” A small royalty on sales is envisaged for those countries, said the release.

For the rest of the countries, GSK “will continue to seek full patent protection...”"

“Other companies, such as Roche, Novartis, Bayer, Astellas, and BMS, with important oncology drugs should begin to engage on expanding access to their patented medicines, beyond just HIV and HCV drugs,” KEI urged."

Sheila Corrall and Kip Currier win LIBER Innovation Award; 45th Annual Conference of LIBER (Ligue des Bibliothèques Européennes de Recherche – Association of European Research Libraries)

LIBER 2016; Sheila Corrall and Kip Currier win LIBER Innovation Award:

The Program Committee for the 45th Annual Conference of LIBER (Ligue des Bibliothèques Européennes de Recherche – Association of European Research Libraries) has selected a paper by Sheila Corrall and James D. “Kip” Currier for a LIBER Innovation Award. The paper on "Legal, Ethical, and Policy Issues of “Big Data 2.0” Collaborative Ventures and Roles for Information Professionals in Research Libraries" will be presented at the conference in Helsinki, Finland, on June 29-July 1, 2016.

The awards are sponsored by OCLC and awarded to the 3 most innovative and relevant papers submitted to the LIBER Conference. Award recipients receive a grant of 1000 euros towards travel and conference registration. The award ceremony takes place at the conference plenary on July 1.

Conference Theme: Libraries Opening Paths to Knowledge

Speed beats trademarks on social media; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 3/29/16

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; Speed beats trademarks on social media:

"Many companies assume that owning a registered trademark means they have a right to any usernames on social media that may be associated with their trademarks. But in the world of social media, the first person to register an account name often has the upper hand, regardless of trademark ownership.

In fact, many companies don’t own user names associated with their well-recognized brands. For example, the Twitter handle @Chipotle is not owned by the Mexican food franchise but by a food blogger named Chip. Likewise, a programmer owns @Velveeta and an actor uses @Advil.

Unless someone is purposely impersonating a company or selling similar products, companies can do little to stop people who registered a username related to their trademarks. Instead, companies must generate alternate usernames. For instance, Chipotle Mexican Grill’s username is @ChipotleTweets, the Kraft Heinz Co. tweets from @EatLiquidGold and Pfizer uses @AdvilRelief...

While trademarks are a powerful tool to protect intellectual property, they are no substitute for speedy registration on social media. Before unveiling a new name or product, companies should register relevant usernames on social media sites."

Worlds collide in ‘Avengers vs. Justice League’ fan trailer; ComicBookResources.com, 4/1/16

Kevin Melrose, ComicBookResources.com; Worlds collide in ‘Avengers vs. Justice League’ fan trailer:

"Using dialogue from X-Men: Age of Apocalypse and The Flash, and footage from a variety of sources, including Avengers: Age of Ultron and Batman v Superman, Shawn Nider lays out an apocalyptic vision for a showdown between heroes of both companies that plenty of destruction in its wake."

GlaxoSmithKline to 'drop patents in poor countries for better drug access'; BBC News, 3/31/16

BBC News; GlaxoSmithKline to 'drop patents in poor countries for better drug access' :

"Pharmaceutical firm GlaxoSmithKline has said it wants to make it easier for manufacturers in the world's poorest countries to copy its medicines. The British company said it would not file patents in these countries.

Chief executive Sir Andrew Witty said he wanted to take a "graduated" approach to the company's "intellectual property" based on the wealth of nations around the globe.

Experts have described the plans as "brave and positive".

GSK hopes that by removing any fear of it filing for patent protection in poorer countries it will allow independent companies to make and sell versions of its drugs in those areas, thereby widening the public access to them."

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

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

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

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

Oracle will seek a staggering $9.3 billion in 2nd trial against Google; ArsTechnica.com, 3/29/16

Joe Mullin, ArsTechnica.com; Oracle will seek a staggering $9.3 billion in 2nd trial against Google:

"In a second go-round of its copyright lawsuit against Google, Oracle is hoping to land a knockout blow. A damages report filed last week in federal court reveals that the enterprise software giant will ask for $9.3 billion in damages.

In its lawsuit, Oracle argues that Google infringed copyrights related to Java when it used 37 Java API packages to create its Android mobile operating system.

The damages it's seeking aren't just more than the Java API packages are worth—it's far more than Oracle paid for the entirety of Sun Microsystems, which was purchased in 2009 for $5.6 billion. By way of comparison, Google parent company Alphabet earned $4.9 billion in profits last quarter, according to IDG News, which reported on the Oracle figures yesterday.

Such a result would be far and away the biggest copyright verdict ever."

31st Annual Intellectual Property Law Conference; American Bar Association (ABA), Bethesda, Maryland, April 6-8, 2016

American Bar Association (ABA); 31st Annual Intellectual Property Law Conference:

"The 31st Annual Intellectual Property Law Conference from the American Bar Association Section of Intellectual Property Law is recognized as the world's premier IP conference.

These three packed days of learning enable you to earn a year's worth of CLE credit from expert sessions presented by the leaders in every area of the profession. We offer what you need to know along with multiple opportunities to mingle with those who should be part of your network."

Open Data Roundtables: Using Government Data as a National Resource; Huffington Post, 3/24/16

Joel Gurin, Huffington Post; Open Data Roundtables: Using Government Data as a National Resource:

"Open government data - free, publicly available data that anyone can use, reuse, and republish - is being recognized as a resource with great social and economic value. But a number of challenges still need to be solved if this resource is to realize its full potential. Today, March 24, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and the Center for Open Data Enterprise are co-hosting the first of four Open Data Roundtables to make open government data more accessible and usable.

These Roundtables are being held at a time when new uses for government data are being developed almost daily. New and established businesses are finding novel ways to use data on weather, finance, demographics, energy, and more. The Obama Administration has launched programs using open data in education (the College Scorecard), criminal justice ( Police Data Initiative), urban neighborhoods (the Opportunity Project), health (Open FDA), and other areas that are critical to citizens.

The 2016 Open Data Roundtables will address four major issues that relate to federal data..."

This open-access picture book from the ‘70s shows how glorious the space race really was; Science Alert, 3/24/16

Jacinta Bowler, Science Alert; This open-access picture book from the ‘70s shows how glorious the space race really was:

"The ‘70s were an exciting time for space exploration. We landed on the Moon in 1969, the Russian Mars 2 probe explored the surface of the red planet in 1973, and things were looking bright for future of space travel.

These recently uploaded - and incredible to look at - illustrations tell the story of the space race, showing just how optimistic we all were back then, as well as some of the cutting edge research and technology from the time...

You can see more high quality images and excerpts all free on Flickr...

But if reading is more your thing, IF Magazine is another science blast from the past that we can’t get over. Launched in March 1952 by Quinn Publications, the science fiction magazine was only ever moderately successful during its relatively short run, but the amazing illustrations and stories inside are timeless, and give a great insight into what we thought the future would look like, from more than half a century ago.

Check out the whole collection here."

The Blue Wars: A Report from the Front; Harvard Law Record, 3/21/16

Carl Malamud, Harvard Law Record; The Blue Wars: A Report from the Front:

"The subject of this legal inquisition is a work you all know well: The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation. A series of letters from Ropes & Gray LLP firmly asserted and repeatedly reminded me of the legal protections surrounding this work including trademark and copyright protections. THE BLUEBOOK A UNIFORM SYSTEM OF CITATION, Registration No. 3,886,986; THE BLUEBOOK, Registration No. 3,756,727; The Bluebook A Uniform System of Citation, 20th edition, Copyright Registration No. TX0008140199 (June 5, 2015).

The Blue Wars started in 2009 when Frank Bennett, a law professor at Nagoya University in Japan, was working on some open source software for legal citation. Professor Bennett wanted to build in a resolution mechanism for common abbreviations, for example mapping the court name “Temporary Emergency Court of Appeals” to the designated abbreviation (“Temp. Emer. Ct. App.”). The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation 234 tbl.T.1 (Columbia Law Review Ass’n et al. eds., 20th ed. 2015).

Professor Bennett applied to the Harv. L. Rev. Ass’n for permission to use the rudimentary Bluebook web site and grab the abbreviations. He was firmly rebuffed. Being an open source acolyte, Professor Bennett felt he was entitled to use those common and obvious abbreviations, so he wrote to his spiritual leader [Lawrence Lessig] for help...

These are the challenges in front of us all. What is at stake is not the future of a $36 book, it is the question of how we communicate the law so that we all understand each other; so that our system of justice can be transparent and clear; so that we all know what we’re talking about when we refer to a source. I hope we can do this together."

Donald Trump Campaign Attacked by Nature Photographers in Copyright Lawsuit; Hollywood Reporter, 3/24/16

Eriq Gardner, Hollywood Reporter; Donald Trump Campaign Attacked by Nature Photographers in Copyright Lawsuit:

"On Wednesday, his presidential campaign was hit with a copyright lawsuit over a portrait of an eagle alleged to be owned by Wendy Shattil and Robert Rozinski, identifying themselves as award-winning professional photographers specializing in nature and wildlife photography. The complaint filed in New York claims that Donald J. Trump for President has misappropriated an iconic photograph for campaign signs and has incited an "epidemic of third-party infringement.""

McDonald's Wants to Trademark a 'Simple' New Slogan; Fortune, 3/25/16

Phil Wahba, Fortune; McDonald's Wants to Trademark a 'Simple' New Slogan:

"The hamburger chain, whose U.S. sales are recovering after years of declines, has filed to register a trademark for the slogan “The Simpler the Better,” a phrase that would echo its recent efforts to streamline its menu to speed up service—long a problem for the company—and tame its bureaucracy.

McDonald’s submitted the application to the U.S. Trademark and Patent Office earlier this month.

The filing doesn’t mean the burger chain will actually use the slogan. A company spokesperson told BurgerBusiness.com, which first reported on this filing, “We routinely file intent-to-use trademark applications as part of our regular course of business. We can’t share details at this time as to how this trademark may or may not be used.” (McDonald’s has trademarked terms such as “McBrunch” without ever using them.)"

Reuters; Gilead ordered to pay Merck $200 million in hepatitis C drug patent dispute; Reuters, 3/24/16

Reuters; Gilead ordered to pay Merck $200 million in hepatitis C drug patent dispute:

"A federal jury on Thursday ordered Gilead Sciences Inc (GILD.O) to pay Merck & Co (MRK.N) $200 million in damages for infringing two Merck patents related to a lucrative cure for hepatitis C.

The damages award is far less than the $2 billion Merck had demanded. On Tuesday, the same jury in San Jose, California, upheld the validity of the patents, which lie at the heart of the dispute over Gilead's blockbuster drugs Sovaldi and Harvoni. Together the medicines had more than $20 billion in U.S. sales in 2014 and 2015."

To boldly go where no copyright suit has gone before; Washington Post, 3/24/16

David Post, Washington Post; To boldly go where no copyright suit has gone before:

"Many of the infringement counts (based on similarities in costume design, backdrops, logos, and the like) look pretty straightforward to me, though I’ll be interested to see what arguments the defendants advance in support of their borrowings. [Fair use, which might ordinarily be counted on to give safe harbor to a fan film, might be difficult to sustain here, given the ostensibly commercial nature of the defendant’s production and the plaintiffs’ argument that the defendants have deprived them of licensing revenues to which they are entitled.]

At the same time, I can’t quite understand why Paramount and CBS are going to the litigation mat here, even if they have good legal grounds for doing so. In a nice twist, Justin Lin, who directs Paramount’s own “Star Trek Beyond,” scheduled for release in July, has come out against the suit (tweeting “This is getting ridiculous! I support the fans. Trek belongs to all of us!”), perhaps concerned that it will turn “Star Trek” fans against the whole enterprise (including his film)."

White House tech office to co-host open data roundtables; FedScoop, 3/22/16

Wyatt Kash, FedScoop; White House tech office to co-host open data roundtables:

"The White House Office of Science Technology Policy has unveiled plans to co-host four open data roundtables, with the first to get underway Thursday, as part of a continuing push to advance the use of federal data.

The sessions are expected to bring together a limited number of technical, policy and legal experts from federal agencies, academia and the private sector — and collect input from the public — as part of an effort to accelerate the use of government open data sets, according to an OSTP briefing.

The roundtables, which will be co-hosted and conducted by the Center for Open Data Enterprise, which conducted similar roundtables last year, will focus on four challenges confronting the open data community...

Asia On The Heels Of US And Europe In Patent Applications At WIPO; Developing Countries Lagging; Intellectual Property Watch, 3/16/16

Catherine Saez, Intellectual Property Watch; Asia On The Heels Of US And Europe In Patent Applications At WIPO; Developing Countries Lagging:

"China, Japan and South Korea are among the top five countries filing international patent applications at the World Intellectual Property Organization, while the United States continues to lead in patent and trademark applications. Far behind, developing countries seem to be having a hard time catching up...

The top 10 countries filing under the PCT in 2015 were the US (57,385), Japan (44,235), and China (29,846), followed by Germany, South Korea, France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Sweden.

According to a WIPO press release, the US has filed the largest annual number of international patent applications for 38 years running. Patent-filing activity by China-based innovators accounted for much of the overall growth in applications, according to the release.

Computer technology and digital communication saw the largest numbers of filing in 2015, each exceeding 16,000, according to the release."

Copyright Office seeks comment on IT modernization plan; FedScoop, 3/18/16

Whitney Blair Wyckoff, FedScoop; Copyright Office seeks comment on IT modernization plan:

"The Copyright Office is seeking comment on a comprehensive technology plan to make its IT “lean, nimble, results-driven, and future-focused.”...

Comments on the plan are due March 31."

As governments open access to data, law lags far behind; ABA Journal, 3/17/16

Lorelai Laird, ABA Journal; As governments open access to data, law lags far behind:

"From municipalities to the White House, governments are launching open data projects—but the judicial branch is falling behind.

Such was the opening, frustrated message of “Public Service Legal Technology in the Data.Gov Era,” a Thursday-morning panel at ABA Techshow.

Adam Ziegler of Harvard Law School’s Library Innovation Lab hammered home the message with a quick tour of government data projects. The federal government has data.gov, a website that offers publicly available data on many topics related to executive branch agencies; 18F: a series of projects from the General Services Administration; and the U.S. Digital Service, a White House project seeking to streamline government services. The White House even has a page on GitHub, a website that allows programmers to post and collaborate on their work.

“We are in an era of amazing progress in access to government data,” said Ziegler, a programmer and former attorney. But “where are we with the law? Almost nowhere, unfortunately.” The nonprofit U.S. Open Data assessed publicly accessible legal information in every state—and found poor accessibility almost everywhere.

Ziegler’s lab is doing its best to change that with its ambitious “Free the Law” project with Ravel Law, which will scan Harvard’s entire 40,000-volume collection of U.S. case law."

Crosswords and copyright; Washington Post, 3/15/16

David Post, Washington Post; Crosswords and copyright:

"What’s interesting, to me, in all this, aside from the light it sheds on puzzle construction, is that it illustrates how “plagiarism,” though it is often conflated with copyright infringement, actually covers very different territory and involves very different interests. A crossword’s “theme” is probably one element of the puzzle-creator’s work that is not protected by copyright; copyright law doesn’t protect “ideas,” only the expression of ideas, and a puzzle’s theme is, in my opinion, just such an unprotectable “idea,” free for the taking (as far as copyright law is concerned). But it’s precisely this kind of taking — theme theft — that gets the angriest response from those in the puzzle-writing business.

This has a direct parallel in academic writing. There, too, the plagiarism norms focus on a kind of borrowing that the law of copyright deems permissible: taking another’s ideas or expression without attribution. Nobody in the academic world will complain if you use their ideas or quote their work — in fact, that’s very much the whole point of the enterprise. But to do so without citation — that will get you into the hottest of hot water. [Just ask Doris Kearns Goodwin, or Stephen Ambrose or Joseph Ellis]. Yet copyright law gives an author no enforceable right to have his/her work properly attributed to him/her — a fact that surprised the hell out of many of my law prof colleagues when they first learned of it (insofar as proper attribution was really the only thing they cared about)."

Asia On The Heels Of US And Europe In Patent Applications At WIPO; Developing Countries Lagging; Intellectual Property Watch, 3/16/16

Catherine Saez, Intellectual Property Watch; Asia On The Heels Of US And Europe In Patent Applications At WIPO; Developing Countries Lagging:

"China, Japan and South Korea are among the top five countries filing international patent applications at the World Intellectual Property Organization, while the United States continues to lead in patent and trademark applications. Far behind, developing countries seem to be having a hard time catching up...

The top 10 countries filing under the PCT in 2015 were the US (57,385), Japan (44,235), and China (29,846), followed by Germany, South Korea, France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Sweden.

According to a WIPO press release, the US has filed the largest annual number of international patent applications for 38 years running. Patent-filing activity by China-based innovators accounted for much of the overall growth in applications, according to the release.

Computer technology and digital communication saw the largest numbers of filing in 2015, each exceeding 16,000, according to the release."

Status of gene patents in Canada unresolved, despite successful challenge; The Canadian Press via CTV News, 3/20/16

The Canadian Press via CTV News; Status of gene patents in Canada unresolved, despite successful challenge:

"One of the most contentious issues in genetics is whether researchers should be allowed to patent human genes found to cause disease and to commercialize diagnostic tests based on those mutated snippets of DNA.

Courts in the U.S. and Australia, for example, have banned the practice, but in Canada no law prohibits scientists from taking out patents on bits of the human genome and their associated products for use in patients.

But an out-of-court settlement earlier this month between an Ottawa hospital and a global company that holds patents on genes and a related test for a potentially deadly heart rhythm disorder may have vastly altered the Canadian gene-patenting landscape.

In what could be characterized as a David and Goliath contest, the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CHEO) launched a court challenge in late 2014 against U.S.-based Transgenomic Inc., which holds patents on five of the flawed genes underpinning long QT syndrome and the diagnostic test for the inherited disorder."

Open Data: Why We Should Care; Huffington Post, 3/17/16

Apolitical, Huffington Post; Open Data: Why We Should Care:

"Excited by the connectivity revolution, governments all over the world are trying to find clever uses for the enormous amounts of digital information they now possess. One of the Big Data movements with the most momentum is Open Data — making this information available to the public. But what good does this actually do? Apolitical spoke to three pioneers in the field in Burkina Faso, Brazil and India, who told us about fighting corruption, ensuring free elections and preventing crime. These real, substantive issues go beyond the inevitably vague buzzwords of transparency and accountability. Here we discover what Open Data can really do about them."

9th Circuit revisits Dancing Baby copyright case: No fair use via algorithm; Ars Technica, 3/18/16

Joe Mullin, Ars Technica; 9th Circuit revisits Dancing Baby copyright case: No fair use via algorithm:

"In September, the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit issued its ruling in the "Dancing Baby" copyright takedown case, initiated by the Electronic Frontier Foundation more than eight years ago. It was a victory for the EFF, but a very mixed one. Today, the court issued an amended opinion that makes the EFF's win stronger."

The latest news on 'To Kill a Mockingbird' shows how big corporations control copyright law; Los Angeles Times, 3/14/16

Michael Hiltzik, Los Angeles Times; The latest news on 'To Kill a Mockingbird' shows how big corporations control copyright law:

"According to a March 4 notice issued by Hachette to booksellers and reported by the New Republic, permission for the mass-market edition has been withdrawn by the novel's publisher, HarperCollins. (HarperCollins also brought out "Go Set a Watchman.") Hachette can sell off its remaining copies, which it's doing at a further discount, but henceforth "Mockingbird" will be available chiefly in a HarperCollins trade paperback edition, which lists for $14.99.

The burden will fall on school districts that traditionally laid in a large volume of mass-market books for their pupils. Hachette says that more than two-thirds of the 30 million copies sold worldwide since publication have been its low-priced edition. Hachette told bookstores, according to the New Republic: "The disappearance of the iconic mass-market edition is very disappointing to us, especially as we understand this could force a difficult situation for schools and teachers with tight budgets who cannot afford the larger, higher priced paperback edition that will remain in the market."

The real problem this development points to is with copyright law, which has been getting consistently rewritten in the United States and other countries to extend the length of authors' rights to the point where their heirs, and heirs of heirs, are the chief beneficiaries of the copyright. But that's only superficially. The real beneficiaries are corporations, which continue to profit from successful works of art for decades after their creators have passed on. Corporations such as HarperCollins...

Yet as we can see from the extinction of the mass-market paperback of "Mockingbird," such extensions stifle the dissemination of creative works rather than encourage it. The squabble over the copyright to Anne Frank's diaries, which we reported on here, also illustrates how the grip of copyright law leaves the control of creative works in the hands of people who may not share the desires of the works' creators. Harper Lee has passed on, Anne Frank is long gone, and Walt Disney is represented in the marketplace by a corporation that is hopelessly far removed from his artistic and even his business creation."

Photo Copyright: Oscar Wilde, Richard Prince, and Your Instagram Content; Huffington Post, 3/15/16

Kim Farbota, Huffington Post; Photo Copyright: Oscar Wilde, Richard Prince, and Your Instagram Content:

"Richard Prince, an "appropriation artist" well-known in creative spheres, is showing blown-up screen shots from his Instagram feed in renowned Manhattan galleries. The contemporary counterparts of Wilde's Gilded Age fan base buy the inkjet-on-canvas prints for upwards of $100,000. The original snappers hear through the proverbial grapevine that their filtered selfies are featured in high-end art shows.

Copyright law has evolved markedly in the century separating Richard Prince from Napoleon Sarony. On the shoulders of Andy Warhol and Jeff Koons, Prince has made a decades-long career selling slightly altered versions of other people's images. He evades copyright infringement liability through legal principles that allow certain "transformative works" to make use of copyright-protected materials without the owner's consent. Broadly, a transformative "fair use" alters or recontextualizes the original work for the purpose of commentary, criticism, or parody. All of the pieces in the Instagram-based New Portraits series include Prince's own original "comment" within the captured frame, submitted via his Instagram handle, "richardprince1234". He also enlarges the images and moves them from digital to print media. The original photos, which cover most of the space on the printed canvases, remain otherwise untouched.

Donald Graham, a career photographer whose portrait of a Rastafarian man was involuntarily featured in New Portraits, is not impressed. In a complaint filed in federal court this January, Graham calls Prince's work a "blatant disregard of copyright law". Graham's suit challenges whether Prince's transformations are sufficient to trigger "fair use" protection...

At the intersection of copyright and social media, balancing the benefits of exposure with the risks of theft and appropriation is an evolving challenge."

4/28/16 Intellectual Property Workshop : Trademark Seminar; Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh

Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh; Intellectual Property Workshop : Trademark Seminar:

Thursday, April 28, 2016

5:30 PM - 8:00 PM

Join us for this workshop that will help you navigate the sometimes confusing world of trademarks. Presenters from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will help you understand the basics of trademark law and what you need to do in order to protect your business name or logo. A limited number of one-on-one appointments with an intellectual property attorney are available from 2:30-4:30; please call 412-622-3133 to secure a spot.

Presented by: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Event fee: Free

Location: International Poetry Room - 2nd Floor Main Library

4400 Forbes Ave

Pittsburgh, PA 15213

Contact: Irene Yelovich

412-622-3133

yelovichi@carnegielibrary.org

4/14/16 Intellectual Property Workshop : Patent Seminar; Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh

Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh; Intellectual Property Workshop : Patent Seminar:

Thursday, April 14, 2016

5:30 PM - 8:00 PM

Join us for this workshop that will help you navigate the often complicated world of patents. Presenters from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will help you understand the basics of patent law and how the patent application process works. A limited number of one-on-one appointments with an intellectual property attorney are available from 2:30-4:30; please call 412-622-3133 to secure a spot.

Presented by: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Event fee: Free

Location: International Poetry Room - 2nd Floor Main Library

4400 Forbes Ave

Pittsburgh, PA 15213

Contact: Irene Yelovich

412-622-3133

yelovichi@carnegielibrary.org

4/7/16 Intellectual Property Workshop: Copyright Seminar; Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh

Intellectual Property Workshop: Copyright Seminar:

Thursday, April 7, 2016

5:30 PM - 8:00 PM

Have you ever wondered how to best protect your artistic or literary works or struggled to determine if you're able to use someone else's content? Learn the basics of copyright law and how to go about applying for copyright protection. A limited number of one-on-one appointments with an intellectual property attorney are available from 2:30-4:30 before the presentation; sign up early to secure a spot.

Presented by: US Patent and Trademark Office

Event fee: Free

Location: International Poetry Room - 2nd Floor Main Library

4400 Forbes Ave

Pittsburgh, PA 15213

Contact: Irene Yelovich

412-622-3133

yelovichi@carnegielibrary.org

Handful of Biologists Went Rogue and Published Directly to Internet; New York Times, 3/15/16

Amy Harmon, New York Times; Handful of Biologists Went Rogue and Published Directly to Internet:

"On Feb. 29, Carol Greider of Johns Hopkins University became the third Nobel Prize laureate biologist in a month to do something long considered taboo among biomedical researchers: She posted a report of her recent discoveries to a publicly accessible website, bioRxiv, before submitting it to a scholarly journal to review for “official’’ publication.

It was a small act of information age defiance, and perhaps also a bit of a throwback, somewhat analogous to Stephen King’s 2000 self-publishing an e-book or Radiohead’s 2007 release of a download-only record without a label. To commemorate it, she tweeted the website’s confirmation under the hashtag #ASAPbio, a newly coined rallying cry of a cadre of biologists who say they want to speed science by making a key change in the way it is published...

The delays prevent scientists from showing off their most recent work to prospective employers or benefactors. They have also, some researchers say, begun to look faintly absurd against the general expectations for speed and openness in the not-so-new digital age. With the rapid spread of the Zika virus, for instance, several journals signed a statement promising that scientists would not be penalized for immediately releasing their findings, given the potential benefit for public health, in turn prompting some scientists to ask, why draw the line at Zika?"

Paramount Claims Crowdfunded 'Star Trek' Film Infringes Copyright to Klingon Language; Hollywood Reporter, 3/13/16

Eriq Gardner, Hollywood Reporter; Paramount Claims Crowdfunded 'Star Trek' Film Infringes Copyright to Klingon Language:

"As promised, the lawsuit launched by Paramount Pictures and CBS over Axanar, a fan-funded Star Trek film, is boldly going places where no man — or Klingon — has gone before. As the Klingons say, "DabuQlu'DI' yISuv."

After the Star Trek rights-holders sued producers, led by Alec Peters, who put out a short film and solicited donations with the aim of making a studio-quality feature set in the year 2245 — before Captain James T. Kirk took command, when the war with the Klingon Empire almost tore the Federation apart — the defendants brought a dismissal motion that faulted Paramount and CBS with not providing enough specificity about which of the "thousands" of copyrights relating to Star Trek episodes and films are being infringed — and how.

Ask and ye shall receive."

Should All Research Papers Be Free?; New York Times, 3/12/16

Kate Murphy, New York Times; Should All Research Papers Be Free? :

"Possibly the biggest barrier to open access is that scientists are judged by where they have published when they compete for jobs, promotions, tenure and grant money. And the most prestigious journals, such as Cell, Nature and The Lancet, also tend to be the most protective of their content.

“The real people to blame are the leaders of the scientific community — Nobel scientists, heads of institutions, the presidents of universities — who are in a position to change things but have never faced up to this problem in part because they are beneficiaries of the system,” said Dr. Eisen. “University presidents love to tout how important their scientists are because they publish in these journals.”

Until the system changes, Ms. Elbakyan said she would continue to distribute journal articles to whoever wants them. Paraphrasing part of the United Nations Charter, she said, “Everyone has the right to freely share in scientific advancement and its benefits.”"