"Carla D. Hayden — President Obama’s nominee to become the 14th librarian of Congress — is one vote away from making history. The Senate Rules Committee recommended that the full Senate approve the nomination of Hayden, 63, to become the new head of the Library of Congress. If approved, the head of Baltimore’s public library system would be the first woman and the first African American to lead the federal agency. A past president of the American Library Association, Hayden has served on the National Museum and Library Services Board since 2010. She earned a master’s degree and doctorate from the University of Chicago. She is credited with improving the Enoch Pratt Free Library in Baltimore, where she has been chief executive for 23 years, by upgrading its technology and establishing it as a vital community resource... Appearing before the Senate committee in April, Hayden acknowledged the challenges facing the sprawling library. Last year, a congressional report criticized the agency for widespread technological failures that wasted tax dollars and caused problems for the Copyright Office and for services for the disabled. Hayden told lawmakers she believed the library could become a model for all libraries, which must adapt to a changing world... The oldest federal cultural institution, the Library of Congress has 3,200 employees and an annual budget of $630 million. It serves as the research arm of Congress, provides Congress with legal advice and runs the Copyright Office, a major player in the world’s digital economy."
Issues and developments related to IP, AI, and OM, examined in the IP and tech ethics graduate courses I teach at the University of Pittsburgh School of Computing and Information. My Bloomsbury book "Ethics, Information, and Technology", coming in Summer 2025, includes major chapters on IP, AI, OM, and other emerging technologies (IoT, drones, robots, autonomous vehicles, VR/AR). Kip Currier, PhD, JD
Tuesday, June 14, 2016
Carla Hayden is one Senate vote away from becoming a groundbreaking librarian of Congress; Washington Post, 6/10/16
Peggy McGlone, Washington Post; Carla Hayden is one Senate vote away from becoming a groundbreaking librarian of Congress:
[Kip Currier: Carla Hayden was an Assistant Professor in the Library and Information Science Department of the University of Pittsburgh School of Information Sciences from 1987-1991.]
Led Zeppelin’s ’Stairway to Heaven’ in Copyright Trial; Wall Street Journal, 6/14/16
[Video] Mark Kelly, Wall Street Journal; Led Zeppelin’s ’Stairway to Heaven’ in Copyright Trial:
"A jury trial begins on Tuesday in Los Angeles to determine whether the opening notes to Led Zeppelin's "Stairway to Heaven" were copied from the song "Taurus" by the band Spirit."
Sunday, June 12, 2016
Citigroup Sues AT&T Over 'Thanks' Word: Copyright Infringement; Tech Times, 6/12/16
Horia Ungureanu, Tech Times; Citigroup Sues AT&T Over 'Thanks' Word: Copyright Infringement:
[Kip Currier: 2 mistakes in this Tech Times article: 1. In the headline. Copyright is neither relevant nor at issue in this case. 2. The Tech Times article's author says "Gizmodo showcases a picture of the patent, in case you need to see it to believe it.", but Patent is not relevant in this case either.
These are two striking examples of how different types of intellectual property are so often misunderstood and confused with one another. This story is an example of Trademark and Gizmodo gets the story right.]
"An unlikely lawsuit started as Citigroup filed a complaint against AT&T, which the credit card company says is infringing upon its trademark. AT&T did not steal Citigroup's logo or slogan or anything of the sort, but it did have the audacity to use the word "thanks" in a campaign addressing customer-loyalty. The bank sued the telecom company, underlining the fact that it has secured a trademark for the word "thanks" some years ago. This is not a late April Fool's Day joke, although we really wish it was. According to the legal complaint that was filed in a Manhattan federal court, AT&T's campaign infringes a few of the trademarks of Citigroup. For example, the credit card enterprise owns both "Citi ThankYou" and "ThankYou." Gizmodo showcases a picture of the patent, in case you need to see it to believe it. As a reminder, Citigroup has been making use of the "ThankYou" trademark since 2004, when it began a customer-loyalty program. The company says that over seven million of its clients have credit cards with the ThankYou slogan written in big letter across them."
Labels:
alleged infringement,
AT&T,
Citigroup,
copyright,
patents,
trademarks
Saturday, June 11, 2016
New York Times Says Fair Use Of 300 Words Will Run You About $1800; New York Times, 6/10/16
Tim Cushing, TechDirt; New York Times Says Fair Use Of 300 Words Will Run You About $1800:
"Fair use is apparently the last refuge of a scofflaw. Following on the heels of a Sony rep's assertion that people could avail themselves of fair use for the right price, here comes the New York Times implying fair use not only does not exist, but that it runs more than $6/word. Obtaining formal permission to use three quotations from New York Times articles in a book ultimately cost two professors $1,884. They’re outraged, and have taken to Kickstarter — in part to recoup the charges, but primarily, they say, to “protest the Times’ and publishers’ lack of respect for Fair Use.” These professors used quotes from other sources in their book about press coverage of health issues, but only the Gray Lady stood there with her hand out, expecting nearly $2,000 in exchange for three quotes totalling less than 300 words. The professors paid, but the New York Times "policy" just ensures it will be avoided by others looking to source quotes for their publications. The high rate it charges (which it claims is a "20% discount") for fair use of its work will be viewed by others as proxy censorship. And when censorship of this sort rears its head, most people just route around it. Other sources will be sought and the New York Times won't be padding its bottom line with ridiculous fees for de minimis use of its articles. The authors' Kickstarter isn't so much to pay off the Times, but more to raise awareness of the publication's unwillingness to respect fair use."
Friday, June 10, 2016
The OPEN Government Data Act Would, Uh, Open Government Data; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), 6/10/16
Elliot Harmon and Aaron Mackey, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); The OPEN Government Data Act Would, Uh, Open Government Data:
"The U.S. government has made huge strides in its open data practices over the last few years. Since it launched in 2009, data.gov has become a crucial source for everything from climate and agricultural data to Department of Education records. For the most part, this new era of data disclosure didn’t happen because Congress passed new laws; it happened through presidential orders and procedural improvements in the Executive Branch. Unfortunately, it might be just as easy for future administrations to roll back the current open data program. That’s why EFF supports a bill that would mandate public access to government data and urges Congress to pass it. Recently introduced in both the House and Senate, the Open, Public, Electronic, and Necessary Government Data Act (OPEN Data Act, S. 2852, H.R. 5051) would require all federal government agencies to automatically make public any data sets they produce, subject to narrow exceptions for national security or other reasons (more on those reasons in a minute). It would also require that that data be shared in a machine-readable format—that is, a format that can be processed by a computer without a person having to manually tinker with each entry. In 2013, President Obama issued an executive order that government data be shared in machine-readable formats. The OPEN Government Data Act would lock that requirement into law and provide a stronger legal definition for machine-readable data. EFF applauds the OPEN Data Act and hopes to see it pass. By turning the good practices that the Executive Branch has gradually adopted into law, the OPEN Data Act can help usher in a new era for U.S. data transparency."
Thursday, June 9, 2016
Open access: All human knowledge is there—so why can’t everybody access it?; Ars Technica, 6/7/16
Glyn Moody, Ars Technica; Open access: All human knowledge is there—so why can’t everybody access it? :
"In 1836, Anthony Panizzi, who later became principal librarian of the British Museum, gave evidence before a parliamentary select committee. At that time, he was only first assistant librarian, but even then he had an ambitious vision for what would one day became the British Library. He told the committee: I want a poor student to have the same means of indulging his learned curiosity, of following his rational pursuits, of consulting the same authorities, of fathoming the most intricate inquiry as the richest man in the kingdom, as far as books go, and I contend that the government is bound to give him the most liberal and unlimited assistance in this respect... The example of The Pirate Bay shows that the current game of domain whack-a-mole is not one that the lawyers are likely to win. But even if they did, it is too late. Science magazine's analysis of Sci-Hub downloads reveals that the busiest city location is Tehran. It wrote: "Much of that is from Iranians using programs to automatically download huge swathes of Sci-Hub’s papers to make a local mirror of the site. Rahimi, an engineering student in Tehran, confirms this. 'There are several Persian sites similar to Sci-Hub'." In this, people are following in the footsteps of Aaron Swartz, with the difference that we don't know what he intended to do with the millions of articles he had downloaded, whereas those mirroring Sci-Hub certainly intend to share the contents widely. It would be surprising if others around the world, especially in emerging economies, are not busily downloading all 45 million papers to do the same."
Beyoncé faces lawsuit over claims Lemonade trailer 'copied' ideas; Guardian, 6/9/16
Guardian; Beyoncé faces lawsuit over claims Lemonade trailer 'copied' ideas:
"A filmmaker has issued a lawsuit against Beyoncé, claiming the trailer for her visual album Lemonade copied images from a short film he had made. Matthew Fulks says his film Palinoia had been seen by a member of Beyoncé’s team, and that a number of scenes appeared to have been recreated in the Lemonade trailer. “The number of aesthetic decisions included in Plaintiff’s Palinoia Work that are parroted in Defendants’ Lemonade Trailer demonstrates that the Lemonade Trailer is substantially similar to the Palinoia Work,” the complaint says. “The misappropriated content includes both the particular elements that the Plaintiff chose to comprise the Palinoia Work and the coordination and arrangement of those particular elements.”"
Ed Sheeran Sued For $20 Million For Allegedly Plagiarzing ‘Photograph’; Huffington Post, 6/8/16
Julia Brucculieri, Huffington Post; Ed Sheeran Sued For $20 Million For Allegedly Plagiarzing ‘Photograph’ :
"The English musician, who happens to be BFFs with Taylor Swift, is reportedly being sued for $20 million dollars over his song “Photograph,” according to Billboard. Songwriters Martin Harrington and Thomas Leonard and their publishing company claim the song borrows heavily from their track, “Amazing,” which was released as a single by 2010 “X Factor” winner Matt Cardle. Harrington and Leonard have written hits for some of the industry’s biggest stars, including Kylie Minogue. To help with their case, the plaintiffs are working with attorney Richard Busch, who was involved in the copyright lawsuit between Marvin Gaye’s family and Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams over the song “Blurred Lines.” If you recall, Thicke and Williams lost the case and contested a $7.4 million jury verdict that found they plagiarized the Motown great’s “Got to Give It Up.” The lawsuit against Sheeran says “Photograph” is too similar to the original composition of “Amazing” by Harrington and Leonard and the version recorded by Cardle. The plaintiffs claim the two songs share 39 identical notes."
Sweden bans M&M's logo in trademark battle; BBC News, 6/8/16
BBC News; Sweden bans M&M's logo in trademark battle:
"A Swedish court has ruled that the confectionery firm Mars can no longer advertise its M&M's brand with the lower case lettering "m&m". The court ruled that the logo is too similar to the single lower case "m" used by the Swedish chocolate covered peanut brand Marabou. If Mars doesn't appeal it will have to use the capital M&M logo in Sweden starting in July... In January, Nestle lost its case to trademark the finger shape of its KitKat bars. A British court ruled that a Norwegian bar, called Kvikk Lunsj, was entitled to use the same shape."
Labels:
finger shape of KitKat bars,
M&M,
Marabou,
Mars,
Nestle,
Sweden,
trademark dispute
Monday, June 6, 2016
Hacker Lexicon: What Is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act?; Wired, 6/6/16
Kim Zetter, Wired; Hacker Lexicon: What Is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act? :
"THE CALL FOR copyright reform in America has grown so loud that Congress has finally heard it. Lawmakers have ordered a slate of studies to look into how to fix what has become a broken system, and activists are cautiously optimistic that this could be the first step toward reform. The source of the fracture? The Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The DMCA was passed in 1998 as an anti-piracy statute effectively making it illegal to circumvent copy protections designed to prevent pirates from duplicating digital copyrighted works and selling or freely distributing them. It also makes it illegal to manufacture or distribute tools or techniques for circumventing copy controls. But in reality the controversial law’s effects have been much broader by allowing game developers, music and film companies and others to keep a tight control on how consumers use their copyrighted works, preventing them in some cases from making copies of their purchased products for their own use or from jailbreaking smartphones and other devices to use them in ways the manufacturers dislike. The DMCA has two problematic sections: section 1201, which deals with the circumvention of copy-protections, and section 512, which allows a copyright holder to send a so-called takedown notice to web sites and others believed to be infringing a copyright."
Led Zeppelin’s ‘Stairway to Heaven’ to Be Scrutinized in Court in Copyright Case; New York Times, 6/5/16
Ben Sisario, New York Times; Led Zeppelin’s ‘Stairway to Heaven’ to Be Scrutinized in Court in Copyright Case:
"Whatever happens with the Led Zeppelin trial, the industry is still trying to understand the effects of the “Blurred Lines” case, which is under appeal. Matt Pincus, the chief executive of Songs Music Publishing, an independent publisher that works with current pop and hip-hop acts like the Weeknd and Desiigner, said his company was seeing far more claims of infringement now — most made privately, outside of court — than ever before. But the reasons were not clear, he said. “It could be opportunism, because lawyers are smelling blood,” Mr. Pincus said. “But it could also be because we have moved to a real collaboration economy now, where pop records have multiple collaborators in a way that they didn’t five or six years ago.” Those collaborators may dispute credits or royalties after the fact."
Guns N' Roses' Axl Rose is trying to get a 'fat photo' off the Internet; CNet, 6/5/16
Aloysius Low, CNet; Guns N' Roses' Axl Rose is trying to get a 'fat photo' off the Internet:
"What would you do if you were the lead singer of Guns N' Roses and some young punks on the Internet used a photo of you to make fat jokes? Well, Axl Rose thinks the best way to deal is to wipe all traces of the picture off the web, and he's starting with Google... Interestingly, the copyright for the original image is tricky. While TorrentFreak did hunt down the original photographer to check if Axl Rose has the right to take down the image, Web Sheriff, the company performing the takedown, says that photographers at the singer's show sign an agreement transferring copyright ownership to his company."
IBM has been awarded an average of 24 patents per day so far in 2016; Quartz, 6/2/16
[2,500th post since this blog was started in 2008--Kip Currier]
Mike Murphy, Quartz; IBM has been awarded an average of 24 patents per day so far in 2016:
"The media tends to focus on the crazy things Google, Facebook, and Apple patent, but they’re still dwarfed by more traditional companies like IBM and Samsung when it comes to the number of patents they’re awarded each year. Through the first half of 2016, IBM has, yet again, been the leader in technology patents, averaging roughly 23.6 patents awarded each day..." The company is in the middle of a painful reinvention, that sees the company shifting further away from hardware sales into cloud computing, analytics, and AI services. It’s also plugging away on a myriad of fundamental scientific research projects—many of which could revolutionize the world if they can come to fruition—which is where many of its patent applications originate."
Public info, now: As county and city improve, the state stays lousy; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 6/6/16
Editorial Board, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; Public info, now: As county and city improve, the state stays lousy:
"County officials in recent days have rolled out new online tools to make certain types of public information more accessible. Controller Chelsa Wagner on Thursday debuted alleghenycounty.opengov.com, which features graphs, charts and sortable data about spending, vendors, employees, salaries and benefits. She also introduced allegheny.openbookportal.com, providing instant access to contracts with vendors... Local governments are getting better at providing basic financial and vendor information to the public, and some officials, such as city Controller Michael Lamb, take pride in providing easy access to public information... Across the state, however, access to public documents is uneven, and obtaining anything beyond routine documents, such as annual budgets, often involves a cumbersome right-to-know process in which the government agency drags its feet and attempts to keep secret anything potentially embarrassing or controversial. Incremental progress on openness should be applauded, but it is important to remember that the larger battle is far from won."
Friday, June 3, 2016
The Google/Oracle decision was bad for copyright and bad for software; Ars Technica, 6/2/16
Peter Bright, Ars Technica; The Google/Oracle decision was bad for copyright and bad for software:
"Oracle's long-running lawsuit against Google has raised two contentious questions. The first is whether application programming interfaces (APIs) should be copyrightable at all. The second is whether, if they are copyrightable, repurposing portions of those APIs can be done without a license in the name of "fair use.""
Thursday, June 2, 2016
Open-access journal eLife gets £25-million boost; Nature, 6/1/16
Ewen Callaway, Nature; Open-access journal eLife gets £25-million boost:
"When three of the world’s biggest private biomedical funders launched the journal eLife in 2012, they wanted to shake up the way in which scientists published their top papers. The new journal would be unashamedly elitist, competing with biology’s traditional ‘big three’, Nature, Science and Cell, to publish the best work. But unlike these, eLife would use working scientists as editors, and it would be open access. And with backers providing £18 million (US$26 million) over five years, authors wouldn’t need to pay anything to publish there. Four years and more than 1,800 publications later, eLife’s funders — the Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Chevy Chase, Maryland, the Wellcome Trust in London and the Max Planck Society in Berlin — announced on 1 June that they will continue their support. They will back the non-profit eLife organization with a further £25 million between 2017 and 2022 (see ‘eLife by the numbers’)."
Madonna prevails in copyright lawsuit over 'Vogue' song; Reuters, 6/2/16
Dan Levine, Reuters; Madonna prevails in copyright lawsuit over 'Vogue' song:
"In a 2-1 vote, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Pasadena, California ruled that a general audience would not recognize the 0.23-second snippet in "Vogue" as originating from the song "Love Break." Shep Pettibone, a producer of "Vogue," also recorded "Love Break" in the early 1980's, according to the court ruling. The plaintiff, VMG Salsoul LLC, owns the copyright to "Love Break" and alleged Pettibone sampled the "horn hit" from the earlier work and added it to "Vogue."... The dissenting judge, Barry Silverman, said even a small sample of music, used without a license, should be a copyright violation. "In any other context, this would be called theft," Silverman wrote. Robert Besser, a lawyer for VMG Salsoul, said in a phone interview: "I agree with the dissent because it should be an infringement for copying any piece of any sound recording." He said his client would review its legal options."
Wednesday, June 1, 2016
Game of Thrones is taking action against Pornhub for breach of copyright; BBC News, 6/1/16
BBC News; Game of Thrones is taking action against Pornhub for breach of copyright:
"The makers of Game of Thrones are taking action against Pornhub over breach of copyright. HBO says it's because some scenes from the show have appeared on the site. Some other videos even include parodies of porn stars pretending to be characters such as Cersei Lannister and Lord Varys from Game of Thrones."
Music World Bands Together Against YouTube, Seeking Change to Law; New York Times, 5/31/16
Ben Sisario, New York Times; Music World Bands Together Against YouTube, Seeking Change to Law:
"The fight over the Digital Millennium Copyright Act has touched a nerve. The music industry is bracing for what may be a high-wattage lobbying battle reminiscent of the one over the Stop Online Piracy Act, a bill that was abandoned in 2012 after opposition from technology activists and Internet giants like Google and Wikipedia. The copyright law gives “safe harbor” to Internet service providers that host third-party material. While music groups criticize the law, some legal scholars and policy specialists say any change to it would need to be considered carefully, particularly to preserve protections like fair use. “Anything that rewrites the D.M.C.A. isn’t just going to affect YouTube,” said James Grimmelmann, a law professor at the University of Maryland. “It is going to affect blogs. It is going to affect fan sites. It is going to affect places for game creators and documentarians and all kinds of others.” In December, the United States Copyright Office asked for comments about D.M.C.A. as part of a review of the law, and filings by record companies show how laborious copyright policing can be."
Reprint of Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’ Tests German Law; New York Times, 6/1/16
Melissa Eddy, New York Times; Reprint of Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’ Tests German Law:
"A German publisher of right-wing books has begun selling a reprint of Adolf Hitler’s “Mein Kampf,” originally issued in 1943 by the Nazi party’s central publishing house, a move that risks violating Germany’s law against the distribution of Nazi propaganda. A copyright on “Mein Kampf” that was held by the Bavarian government expired on Dec. 31, and an annotated scholarly edition was published this year with government permission. Now, state prosecutors in the German city of Leipzig, where the publisher, Der Schelm, is based, are investigating whether they can press charges . Last week, prosecutors in Bamberg opened a separate investigation after a bookseller, who was not identified, advertised Der Schelm’s edition. Although Hitler’s two-volume treatise, written from 1924 to 1927 and laying out his ideas on race and violence, is widely available on the internet, the annotated version is the only one that is legal in Germany. The 3,500 comments accompanying the text provide context for the work, and they are aimed, in part, at trying to prevent a new generation from taking up Nazi ideologies. “Promoting an edition without annotations is considered a criminal offense,” Christopher Rosenbusch, a spokesman for prosecutors in Bamberg, said on Wednesday."
Donald Trump's 'playbooks' offer a glimpse into his ruthless business practices; Guardian, 6/1/16
Rupert Neate and Lauren Gambino, Guardian; Donald Trump's 'playbooks' offer a glimpse into his ruthless business practices:
"US district court judge Gonzalo Curiel on Tuesday made public more than 400 pages of Trump University “playbooks” describing how Trump staff should target prospective students’ weaknesses to encourage them to sign up for a $34,995 Gold Elite three-day package. Trump University staff were instructed to get people to pile on credit card debt and to target their financial weaknesses in an attempt to sell them the high-priced real estate courses. The documents contained an undated “personal message” from Trump to new enrollees at the school: “Only doers get rich. I know that in these three packed days, you will learn everything to make a million dollars within the next 12 months.”... New York attorney general Eric Schneiderman, who has also sued Trump University, renewed his attacks on Trump on Tuesday. “You are not allowed to protect the trade secrets of a three-card Monte game,” Schneiderman said ahead of the document’s release."
Tuesday, May 31, 2016
Why Google’s fair use victory over Oracle matters; Guardian, 5/31/16
Pamela Samuelson, Guardian; Why Google’s fair use victory over Oracle matters:
"Further cascades of liability could have happened outside the Android ecosystem. An Oracle victory in the Google case would have emboldened other software firms with valuable APIs to become more aggressive in challenging unlicensed uses of those APIs. Someone wanting to develop a program to run on another firm’s platform must use that platform’s API to enable the second program to interoperate with the platform. (Think of an API as an information equivalent to the plug and socket configurations that are necessary for physical devices to interoperate with the electrical grid.) If the second program isn’t configured to send and receive information in the precise way that the first program’s API specifies, it just won’t work at all. If the developer of an API owns copyright in that API, it can say no to any unlicensed use of it. Or it can condition its willingness to license use of the API on high royalties or impose restrictions on the other firm’s development (such as forbidding adaptation of the same program to run on other platforms). Since 1992, courts have overwhelmingly rejected copyright claims in program interface specifications. These rulings are consistent with the prevailing norm in the computing industry since its early days: that it is OK to use another firm’s API as long as the second firm reimplements the API in independently written code. Over the past two decades, the software industry has thrived because the court rulings converged with industry norms that allow innovative software developers to build upon existing programs and platforms to offer consumers many choices of products for smart phones and other computing devices."
Open Data Platform Lets Aid Groups Respond More Efficiently To Crises; Huffington Post, 5/27/16
Eleanor Goldberg, Huffington Post; Open Data Platform Lets Aid Groups Respond More Efficiently To Crises:
"When a humanitarian crisis hits, there’s an inevitable mad scramble to collect data, which is often scattered, limited and fail to offer a “big picture” of the situation at hand. Nearly two years after the launch of the Humanitarian Data Exchange, however, governments, nonprofits, aid workers and the general public can now share information from the ground and upload it to one platform so that it’s stored, and accessible, in a single location. The goal is to be able to offer up humanitarian aid in an efficient and faster way. The project, which is managed by the U.N.’s Office for the Coordination of Human Affairs, now covers about 250 locations across the world. Those include Ecuador and Kenya’s Kakuma refugee camp, according to Reuters."
Kraftwerk loses hip-hop music-sampling copyright case; Ars Technica, 5/31/16
Jennifer Baker, Ars Technica; Kraftwerk loses hip-hop music-sampling copyright case:
"After a decades-long battle, the Bundesverfassungsgericht (the supreme German Constitutional Court) has overturned a ban on a song that used a two-second sample of a Kraftwerk recording. In 1997, music producer Moses Pelham used a clip from 1977 release Metall auf Metall (Metal on Metal) in the song Nur mir (Only Mine) performed by Sabrina Setlur. Lead singer of Kraftwerk, Ralf Huetter, sued Pelham, and in 2012 the electropop pioneer won his case for copyright infringement in Germany's Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof), gaining damages and a block on Nur mir. However, in today’s judgment, the eight judges of the First Senate of the Federal Constitutional Court decided that the lower court did not sufficiently consider whether the impact of the sample on Krafwerk might be “negligible.” Pelham successfully argued that sampling is common practice in the hip hop genre and that in some cases “artistic freedom overrides the interest of the owner of the copyright.""
Monday, May 30, 2016
Universities seek united front in open access debate; University World News, 5/13/16
Munyaradzi Makoni, University World News; Universities seek united front in open access debate:
"Both a unified front and a paradigm shift around access to knowledge were needed in order to deal with rising journal costs and exclusionary copyright provisions imposed by the mainstream academic publishing industry, a Leadership Dialogue on open access and African research publishing heard. Embracing open access initiatives was now critical, according to Piyushi Kotecha, chief executive officer of the Southern African Regional Universities Association or SARUA, which hosted the Leadership Dialogue in Cape Town ahead of the British Council’s Going Global 2016 conference, held from 3-5 May. Attended by vice-chancellors from a range of countries, the meeting was supported by UNESCO, the Magna Charta Observatory and the University of Cape Town’s Intellectual Property Unit. With an emphasis on collaborative solutions, the aim was to explore open access approaches as a means to address problems of scholarship access among Southern African universities at a time when the global debate was shifting to “less dogmatic ways of interpreting open access”, according to the event invitation."
Why Google's victory in a copyright fight with Oracle is a big deal; Vox, 5/26/16
Timothy B. Lee, Vox; Why Google's victory in a copyright fight with Oracle is a big deal:
"Google's version of Java didn't reuse any code from Oracle's version. But to ensure compatibility, Google's version used functions with the same names and functionality. This practice was widely viewed as legal within the software world at the time Google did it, but Oracle sued, arguing that this was copyright infringement. Oracle argued that the list of Java function names and features constitutes a creative work, and that Google infringed Oracle's copyright when it included functions with the same names and features. Google argued that the list of function names, known as an application programming interface (API), was not protected by copyright law. Google's defenders pointed to a landmark 1995 ruling in which an appeals court held that the software company Borland had not infringed copyright when it created a spreadsheet program whose menus were organized in the same way as the menus in the more popular spreadsheet Lotus 1-2-3. The court held that the order of Lotus 1-2-3 menu items was an uncopyrightable "method of operation." And it concluded that giving Lotus exclusive ownership over its menu structure would harm the public... Google believed that its own copying was directly analogous to what Borland had done. There were thousands of programmers with expertise in writing Java programs. By designing its platform to respond to the same set of programming commands as Oracle's Java system, Google allowed Java programmers to become Android programmers with minimal training — just as Borland's decision to copy Lotus's menu structure avoided unnecessary training for seasoned Lotus 1-2-3 users."
Skrillex and Justin Bieber on Sorry copyright claims: 'We didn't steal this'; Guardian, 5/30/16
Guardian; Skrillex and Justin Bieber on Sorry copyright claims: 'We didn't steal this':
"Dienel, also known as White Hinterland, claims the pair used her vocal loop without permission on their No1 track. The clip in question is used repeatedly through her 2014 song Ring the Bell, and she reportedly claims that the “unique characteristics of the female vocal riff” have been copied. When asked about the case, US DJ Diplo, who worked with Bieber and Skrillex on the Jack Ü project, told TMZ: “I thought they sampled it, but I thought they cleared it. I’m sure they’ll work out a deal with her. They don’t want to go to court with it.""
Sunday, May 29, 2016
In dramatic statement, European leaders call for ‘immediate’ open access to all scientific papers by 2020; Science, 5/27/16
Martin Enserink, Science; In dramatic statement, European leaders call for ‘immediate’ open access to all scientific papers by 2020:
"In what European science chief Carlos Moedas calls a "life-changing" move, European Union member states today agreed on an ambitious new open access (OA) target. All scientific papers should be freely available by 2020, the Competitiveness Council—a gathering of ministers of science, innovation, trade, and industry—concluded after a 2-day meeting in Brussels. But some observers are warning that the goal will be difficult to achieve. The OA goal is part of a broader set of recommendations in support of Open Science, a concept which also includes improved storage of and access to research data. The Dutch government, which currently holds the rotating E.U. presidency, had lobbied hard for Europe-wide support for Open Science, as had Carlos Moedas, the European Commissioner for Research and Innovation... A spokesperson for the Competitiveness Council admits the 2020 target "may not be an easy task," but stresses the importance of the council's new resolve. "This is not a law, but it's a political orientation for the 28 governments. The important thing is that there is a consensus." The council's statement is also slightly ambiguous on what exactly should be accomplished by 2020."
Must stop bill to copyright public records; San Jose Mercury News, 6/28/16
Thomas Peele, San Jose Mercury News; Must stop bill to copyright public records:
"In a blog post EFF legislative counsel Ernesto Falcon made it clear the potential chilling effect on free speech and public participation Stone has proposed. "Such a broad grant of copyright authority to state and local governments will chill speech, stifle open government, and harm the public domain," Falcon wrote. "If a citizen infringed on a state owned copyright by making a copy of a government publication, or reading that publication out loud in a public setting, or uploading it to the Internet, they could be liable. ..." Does Stone want to keep news organizations and others from freely posting public records that show wrongdoing, abuse, corruption, misuse of public funds? Rather than working to make access to records more difficult, state lawmakers should working to make them more accessible."
Judge Orders Release of Documents in Trump University Lawsuit; Wall Street Journal, 5/28/16
Jacob Gershman, Wall Street Journal; Judge Orders Release of Documents in Trump University Lawsuit:
"Among the documents to be unsealed are two sets of Trump University “playbooks,” outlining rules and procedures for running Trump University events and employee scripts for engaging with customers. Some of the documents have already surfaced online. Online political website Politico in March posted a 2010 Trump University playbook, which instructed employees to rank students by liquid assets to help determine what kind of course packages they could afford to buy. Other documents would be made public for the first time, including a sales playbook the judge said contained marketing techniques for selling Trump University programs. The unsealed versions will redact phone numbers and noncorporate email addresses. Judge Curiel ordered the documents released by June 2. He was responding to an April request by the Washington Post for the records to be unsealed. Lawyers for Mr. Trump opposed making the documents public, arguing that the materials contained trade secrets."
Friday, May 27, 2016
Google Prevails as Jury Rebuffs Oracle in Code Copyright Case; New York Times, 5/26/16
Nick Wingfield and Quentin hardy, New York Times; Google Prevails as Jury Rebuffs Oracle in Code Copyright Case:
"Some lawyers cautioned against viewing the verdict as a green light for the type of software development Google performed, saying that the earlier federal appeals court decision validated the idea that A.P.I.s can be copyrighted. “I don’t think the industry can sit back and rely on this decision and exhale and say these things won’t be protected,” said Christopher Carani, a lawyer at McAndrews, Held & Malloy. “I think what you’re still going to see is a lot more attention paid to securing approval to use other copyrights before the fact.” John Bergmayer, a senior staff attorney at Public Knowledge, a consumer rights group, cheered the verdict in a statement, but said he remained troubled by the implications of the earlier court decision. “Other courts of appeal should reject the Federal Circuit’s mistaken finding of copyrightability,” he said. “For now, though, the jury’s verdict is a welcome dose of common sense.”"
Labels:
alleged copyright infringement,
APIs,
fair use,
Google,
Oracle
Thursday, May 26, 2016
One company has a big edge in the fight to dominate the Internet of Things; Quartz, 5/23/16
Joon Ian Wang, Quartz; One company has a big edge in the fight to dominate the Internet of Things:
"Most of the innovation on the so-called Internet of Things is locked up in patents held by the companies that make the innards of sensors, routers, and other devices, according to a study by LexInnova, a consultancy. The study finds that the companies with the greatest number of IoT patents globally are the chip-makers Qualcomm and Intel, followed by Chinese network-gear maker ZTE... Where Qualcomm and Intel are neck and neck on absolute numbers of patents, Qualcomm has a significantly stronger patent portfolio, according to LexInnova’s research. This might be a major problem for Intel, which has staked its future on IoT. Brian Krzanich, its chief executive, called the company’s IoT group a “primary growth engine” in his 2015 shareholder’s letter. It reported revenue of $651 million for its IoT group for the first quarter of 2016, 22% higher than the previous year. Qualcomm doesn’t report numbers for its IoT products, although it said last year that it made $1 billion in revenue from chips used in smart homes, city infrastructure, cars, and wearables."
Wednesday, May 25, 2016
Unaffordable Medicines Now Global Issue; System Needs Change, Panellists Say; Intellectual Property Watch,
Catherine Saez, Intellectual Property Watch; Unaffordable Medicines Now Global Issue; System Needs Change, Panellists Say:
"At a side event to this week’s annual World Health Assembly, a member of the Netherlands Ministry of Health delivered an unexpected speech on access to medicines, calling for more clarity in the setting of medicine prices, looking inside and outside of the patent system for solutions, and praising de-linkage. Other panellists viewed partnerships as a key ingredient to fill research and development gaps. And a representative from the Gates Foundation advised against a hasty switch to new system."
Huawei sues Samsung over patents; BBC News, 5/25/16
BBC News; Huawei sues Samsung over patents:
"However, Huawei has said at least some of them are classed as Frand - an acronym referring to "fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory". This means the Chinese company has committed itself to offering anyone a licence so long as they agree to a non-excessive compensation. This kind of agreement is common in the tech sector as it makes it possible for different companies' products to communicate and share data formats with each other... "Huawei may have initiated litigation as lever to get a settlement," commented Ilya Kazi from the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys. "We don't know if it intends to go all the way through. Most cases do settle.""
Tuesday, May 24, 2016
MARVEL & DC COMICS DROP CASE AGAINST SMALL BUSINESSMAN OVER USE OF THE WORD "SUPERHERO"; Comic Book Resources, 5/24/16
Meagan Damore, Comic Book Resources; MARVEL & DC COMICS DROP CASE AGAINST SMALL BUSINESSMAN OVER USE OF THE WORD "SUPERHERO":
"Marvel and DC Comics have officially dropped a case against small businessman Graham Jules over the use of the word "superhero." According to The Mirror, Jules can now legally use the word in his book title "Business Zero to Superhero." When Jules attempted to publish his start-up manual, the two major comic book companies contested his use of "superhero," as the two publishers had jointly trademarked the word in 1979, covering a range of products, from comic books and playing cards to pencil sharpeners and glue. Their renewal of that mark in 2006 drew widespread attention, as well as scrutiny from those who question whether such a term should be allowed to be registered. They claimed Jules' title infringed on this trademark, while he argued that the word had become part of everyday language.
Embarking on a New Adventure: Open Data at the US Patent and Trademark Office; USPTO, 5/24/16
Michelle K. Lee, Huffington Post; Embarking on a New Adventure: Open Data at the US Patent and Trademark Office:
"When the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office heard President Obama’s call to provide the public with transparency and open government, I wasn’t exactly sure how one of the country’s oldest federal agencies would be able to respond. I challenged a small internal team to act like a “start-up” and develop some new ideas on how to use the vast reserves of data the USPTO gathers to help solve some of the agency’s age old challenges. They built a platform to dive into what very well may be the world’s largest repository of data on innovation and research and development technology trends. The unveiling of the USPTO’s new Open Data and Mobility Program offers a new platform in an ecological way to discover, explore, and innovate. I’m thrilled to say this month we made a great leap into exposing the world to this wealth of information when we launched the USPTO’s new Developer Hub. We’re providing vast data sets, interactive visualizations, and a community platform for sharing and discussing this data. While this treasure trove of data has been available to the public for centuries, we also provided a step-by-step guide for you, the user, to create your own insights about innovation and share it with the world in the community café. Go to github link to get the tutorial and be empowered - http://commercedataservice.github.io/tutorial_pto/."
Making the Transition to Gold Open Access; Library Journal, 5/19/16
John Parsons, Library Journal; Making the Transition to Gold Open Access:
"Unlike other digital goods markets like eBooks or music, where a single dominant player can coordinate rapid change, scientific publishing is fragmented and heterogeneous. There are a multitude of publishers, disciplines, and funding organizations. “Like any other platform shift, it will take everybody on both sides to do it,” said Mark McCabe, a lecturer at Boston University’s Questrom School of Business, and Professor and Director of the Digital Business Program at SKEMA Business School in France. “The transition between business models is a process that requires major players to subsidize or sponsor it. In the context of OA, the coordination challenges are substantial. This will take time...” However, increasing pressure from researchers outside Western Europe and North America, as well as mandates from the EU, may eventually force even reluctant publishers and institutions to adopt the Gold model. “The thing about science is that if traditional publishers were to disappear tomorrow, research would still be conducted and articles would still be written,” McCabe said. “Research authors aren’t selling books or songs; they just want to get their stuff out there in the best way possible, and have it read by anyone who needs it.”"
A Little Understanding Motivates Copyright Abusers To Pay Up; Forbes, 5/23/16
Michael Blanding, Forbes; A Little Understanding Motivates Copyright Abusers To Pay Up:
"Obtaining an image from the Internet is as easy as right-clicking and downloading. We’ve all done it—or, ahem, know someone who has. We rarely think about who created these images or whether we have the rights to use them. This leaves the owners of those images with a conundrum: Should they pursue the violators? First off, the monetary amounts at stake are often small—tens or hundreds of dollars in licensing fees. Is it worth the time, cost, and effort to send a bunch of settlement request letters? Second, few of these types of digital copyright infringements wind up in court. So why bother if the ultimate enforcement mechanism seems so far-fetched? Harvard Business School Assistant Professor Hong Luo looks at these questions in a 2015 working paper, “Copyright Enforcement: Evidence from Two Field Experiments,” co-written with Julie Holland Mortimer of Boston College and the National Bureau of Economic Research. The paper was updated earlier this year. Their findings about how to motivate copyright violators to actually pay up are important not only for copyright holders, but also applicable to many disputes involving small amounts."
Revealed: How copyright law is being misused to remove material from the internet; Guardian, 5/23/16
Alex Hern, Guardian; Revealed: How copyright law is being misused to remove material from the internet:
"Censorship by copyright The motivation of Ashraf can only be guessed at, but censorship using the DMCA is common online. The act allows web hosts a certain amount of immunity from claims of copyright infringement through what is known as the “safe harbour” rules: in essence, a host isn’t responsible for hosting infringing material provided they didn’t know about it when it went up, and took it down as soon as they were told about it. In practice, however, this means that web hosts (and the term is broadly interpreted, meaning sites like YouTube, Twitter and Google count) are forced to develop a hair-trigger over claims of copyright infringement, assuming guilt and asking the accused to prove their innocence. As such, a very easy way to remove something from the internet is to accuse its creator of infringing copyright. Worse, the potential downside of such a false claim is minimal: the accused would have to first file a counterclaim, proving they own the copyright; then file a private lawsuit, and prove material damage; and then track down the offending party to actually recover any monies granted by the court. That doesn’t happen all that often. But in recent years, big web companies have started funding lawsuits themselves, to fill the gap in the law and tilt the scales a bit further in favour of content creators wrongly accused."
Hungarian singer sues Kanye West for $2.5m over New Slaves sample; Reuters via Guardian, 5/23/16
Reuters via Guardian; Hungarian singer sues Kanye West for $2.5m over New Slaves sample:
"Presser described his song, which roughly translates in English as “Pearls in Her Hair”, as “one of the most beloved pop songs ever in Hungary and across eastern Europe”. He is seeking at least $2.5m in damages for copyright infringement. Lawyers for West and co-defendant Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC, a joint venture between Sony Corp and the estate of pop star Michael Jackson, did not immediately respond on Monday to requests for comment. Presser said he had no inkling his song was being used until West’s lawyer emailed him soon after marketing began, indicating that West “would like to work out a deal with you as soon as possible” and giving him 24 hours to respond. West’s lawyers later sent Presser a $10,000 check and insisted that he grant a license. But Presser never cashed the check, the complaint said."
Saturday, May 21, 2016
Paramount to Drop Lawsuit Against ‘Star Trek’ Fan Film; Comic Book Resources, 5/21/16
Kevin Melrose, Comic Book Resources; Paramount to Drop Lawsuit Against ‘Star Trek’ Fan Film:
"Paramount Pictures plans to withdraw its controversial lawsuit against a crowdfunded “Star Trek” fan film, a move that will undoubtedly earn the studio goodwill as it prepares to release “Star Trek Beyond” amid the franchise’s 50th-anniversary celebration. The announcement was made Friday by J.J. Abrams during a fan event on the Paramount lot, where the filmmaker said the litigation is “going away” within the next few weeks."
Friday, May 20, 2016
Oracle-Google Dispute Goes to Heart of Open-Source Software; New York Times, 5/19/16
Quentin Hardy, New York Times; Oracle-Google Dispute Goes to Heart of Open-Source Software:
"With jury deliberations expected to start next week, whether it makes sense to nontechies that Google, as Mr. Page contends, engaged in “established industry practice” and not old-fashioned copyright infringement could have a significant impact on how the technology industry creates new products. The copyrights that are crucial to the trial are related to open-source software, which is created and shared for general use. Open-source technology is at the heart of many current innovations, from Google’s Android to the hardware going into giant cloud-computing data centers. “The open-source community will heave a huge sigh of relief if Google wins, and will be very worried if Oracle wins,” said Pamela Samuelson, professor of law at the University of California, Berkeley. “It will have a chilling effect.”"
Avengers and X-Men wage war in action-packed fan trailer; Comic Book Resources, 5/20/16
Kevin Melrose, Comic Book Resources; Avengers and X-Men wage war in action-packed fan trailer:
"Fans at last saw Spider-Man introduced into the Marvel Cinematic Universe with Captain America: Civil War, but it will be a long, long time before they witness the X-Men do the same. Until then, they can watch this epic fan trailer, which pits Marvel’s mutants against Earth’s Mightiest Heroes, over and over and over again."
Do You Love Music? Silicon Valley Doesn’t; New York Times, 5/20/16
Jonathan Taplin, New York Times; Do You Love Music? Silicon Valley Doesn’t:
"Unfortunately, there is a sad history of undervaluing musicians in the United States. Terrestrial radio, a $17 billion industry, pays publishing rights (payments to songwriters) but has never paid artists or record companies for music. In addition, the satellite radio company, SiriusXM, pays below-market royalties, thanks to a giveaway it first wrested from Congress 20 years ago. Conglomerates like iHeartMedia (formerly Clear Channel Communications) and other online services like Pandora, which are required to pay artists for digital streams, have exploited federal copyright law to deny payments for work recorded before 1972 (songwriters are paid; performers are not). This means artists like Aretha Franklin, Ella Fitzgerald, Chuck Berry and John Coltrane never received a dime from AM/FM radio and or from many digital services for some of their greatest music. The last meaningful legislation in this area was the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in 1998, which was based on the idea that creators should monitor the Internet for illegal copies of their works and give “notice” to websites and services to take pirated material down. Under the act’s “safe harbor” provisions, any service or site that makes a minimal effort to address these notices is immune from liability for piracy or theft."
Thursday, May 19, 2016
Google patents 'sticky' layer to protect pedestrians in self-driving car accidents; Guardian, 5/18/16
Nicky Woolf, Guardian; Google patents 'sticky' layer to protect pedestrians in self-driving car accidents:
"Google has patented a new “sticky” technology to protect pedestrians if – or when – they get struck by the company’s self-driving cars. The patent, which was granted on 17 May, is for a sticky adhesive layer on the front end of a vehicle, which would aim to reduce the damage caused when a pedestrian hit by a car is flung into other vehicles or scenery... It is not known whether Google has active plans to install the new technology on their self-driving cars in the future. The company did not respond immediately to a request from the Guardian for comment, but a spokesperson told the San Jose Mercury News, who first reported the story, that “we hold patents on a variety of ideas. Some of those ideas later mature into real products and services, some don’t.”"
Tuesday, May 17, 2016
Colleges Shouldn’t Have to Deal With Copyright Monitoring; Chronicle of Higher Education, 5/17/16
Pamela Samuelson, Chronicle of Higher Education; Colleges Shouldn’t Have to Deal With Copyright Monitoring:
"Colleges have a big stake in the outcome of the lawsuit that three publishers, Cambridge University Press, Oxford University Press, and Sage Publications, brought against Georgia State University officials for copyright infringement. The lawsuit, now in its eighth year, challenged GSU’s policy that allowed faculty members to upload excerpts (mainly chapters) of in-copyright books for students to read and download from online course repositories. Four years ago, a trial court held that 70 of the 75 challenged uses were fair uses. Two years ago, an appellate court sent the case back for a reassessment under a revised fair-use standard. The trial court has just recently ruled that of the 48 claims remaining in the case, only four uses, each involving multiple chapters, infringed. The question now is, What should be the remedy for those four infringements?... Appellate courts generally defer to lower-court fact-finding, especially when the findings are as extensive as in the GSU case. As an author of book chapters (for which I have never been paid, but which I would like students to read) and as a faculty member who posts some in-copyright materials on course websites, I’m rooting for GSU on the coming appeal. If the overwhelming majority of the university’s uses were fair, it doesn’t make sense to impose substantial and costly compliance measures on it. Colleges, students, faculty members, and academic-book-chapter authors will win if the publishers lose once again."
USPTO Regional Offices Forge Ahead in 2016; USPTO Director' Forum Blog, 5/17/16
Michelle K. Lee, USPTO Director' Forum Blog; USPTO Regional Offices Forge Ahead in 2016:
"Blog by Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO Michelle K. Lee USPTO regional offices support our core mission of fostering American innovation and competitiveness by offering services to entrepreneurs, inventors, and small businesses, while effectively engaging communities and local industries. All four of our regional offices now have directors, making us well-positioned to fully advance this mission. The establishment of four USPTO regional offices fulfills a commitment dating to September 16, 2011, when President Obama signed the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) into law. All the regional offices have been busy these last few months, including holding events for World IP Day and enabling local innovators to participate virtually in the Patent Quality Community Symposium... The USPTO regional offices play an important role in supporting the overall mission of our agency, including ensuring easier access by innovators and entrepreneurs to resources and intellectual property protections they need to compete in today’s global economy. To find out more about events in any of our regional offices, visit the events page of the USPTO website, and for employment opportunities, visit USAjobs.gov for openings. I will continue to keep you informed about new updates on our regional offices throughout the year on this blog."
GSU e-Reserves Decision; Library Journal, 5/12/16
Kyle K. Courtney, Library Journal; GSU e-Reserves Decision:
"The infamous Georgia State University (GSU) e-reserves case (Cambridge University Press v. Patton) emerged last month from its long winter slumber to give us yet another 200+ page decision which librarians, lawyers, and publishers have begun to parse and analyze. And, like me, they are probably asking themselves: What does this decision actually mean?"
Monday, May 16, 2016
Printed book sales rise for first time in four years as ebooks decline; Guardian, 5/13/16
Mark Sweney, Guardian; Printed book sales rise for first time in four years as ebooks decline:
"Sales of printed books have grown for the first time in four years, lifted by the adult colouring book craze and 150th anniversary of Alice in Wonderland, as ebooks suffered their first ever decline. Ebook sales fell by 1.6% to to £554m in 2015, the first drop recorded in the seven years industry body the Publishers Association has been monitoring the digital book market. Meanwhile, sales of printed books grew by 0.4% to £2.76bn."
Saturday, May 14, 2016
A World Without Patents; Forbes, 5/12/16
David Pridham, Forbes; A World Without Patents:
"On the surface, Cuozzo Speed Technologies v. Lee is about whether the Patent Office (PTO) can use a different standard in hearing challenges to a patent’s validity after it’s been granted than the standard used by the federal courts. It’s also about whether the taking of a legal property right (a patent) ought to happen via an administrative hearing, without judicial review. During oral arguments, Chief Justice John Roberts seemed shocked by the PTO’s system for challenging patents, known as Inter Partes Reviews (IPRs), calling it a “bizarre way … to decide a legal question” and a “very extraordinary animal in legal culture to have two different proceedings addressing the same question that lead to different results.” He was referring to the fact that a patent upheld as valid and infringed by the federal courts can then be taken by the infringing defendant to the PTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and declared invalid!... Even if you stipulate that there are bad patents that shouldn’t have been issued, is it really believable that 90% of all patents granted are invalid — despite being issued only after careful review by PTO examiners in a process that takes over two years and results in the rejection of half of all patent applications? If we really believe that 90% of Patent Office output is garbage, then we should just shut the agency down and save everyone all the trouble. There would be consequences, of course. Without patents and the competitive protections they afford, individuals and companies will not invest the money it takes to develop new cures for disease or create new technological wonders. That’s because they know others will simply copy their inventions with impunity and then sell them at a much lower cost, since it didn’t cost them a dime to develop these in the first place. This is a terrific way to drive the innovators out of any industry."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)