James Robinson, (London) Guardian; Arianna Huffington hits back at Washington Post veteran: HuffPo founder accuses Leonard Downie Jr, who branded aggregators as 'parasites', of 'pointing fingers and calling names':
"Huffington responded: "People like Downie continue to confuse aggregation with wholesale misappropriation, which violates copyright law."
She said that although her site does feature news from other providers, "aggregation goes along with a tremendous amount of original content, including original reporting and over 300 original blogposts a day".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/sep/24/huffington-post-washington-post
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Disturbia did not steal Rear Window plot, judge rules; (London) Guardian, 9/22/10
Xan Brooks, (London) Guardian; Disturbia did not steal Rear Window plot, judge rules: US judge throws out lawsuit accusing Spielberg-backed 2007 film of copying the Cornell Woolrich short story on which Hitchcock's 1954 thriller was based:
"On the face of it, the 2007 thriller Disturbia may look like a direct steal from Alfred Hitchcock's classic Rear Window. Yesterday, however, the courts decided otherwise.
"The main plots are similar only at a high, unprotectable level of generality," ruled New York district court judge Laura Taylor Swan, throwing out a lawsuit that accused Disturbia's makers of copyright infringement."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/sep/22/disturbia-plot-re
"On the face of it, the 2007 thriller Disturbia may look like a direct steal from Alfred Hitchcock's classic Rear Window. Yesterday, however, the courts decided otherwise.
"The main plots are similar only at a high, unprotectable level of generality," ruled New York district court judge Laura Taylor Swan, throwing out a lawsuit that accused Disturbia's makers of copyright infringement."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/sep/22/disturbia-plot-re
YouTube Can’t Be Liable on Copyright, Spain Rules; New York Times, 9/24/10
Eric Pfanner, New York Times; YouTube Can’t Be Liable on Copyright, Spain Rules:
"A Spanish court on Thursday sided with Google in a dispute with the broadcaster Telecinco, saying Google’s online video-sharing service, YouTube, did not have to screen television clips for potential copyright violations before posting them on the site.
The decision, by a commercial court in Madrid, follows a similar ruling in the United States in June, when a judge rejected copyright infringement claims against YouTube by the media company Viacom. Like the American court, the judge in Madrid said YouTube was not liable as long as it removed copyrighted material when notified by the rights holder."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/24/technology/24google.html?scp=1&sq=copyright&st=cse
"A Spanish court on Thursday sided with Google in a dispute with the broadcaster Telecinco, saying Google’s online video-sharing service, YouTube, did not have to screen television clips for potential copyright violations before posting them on the site.
The decision, by a commercial court in Madrid, follows a similar ruling in the United States in June, when a judge rejected copyright infringement claims against YouTube by the media company Viacom. Like the American court, the judge in Madrid said YouTube was not liable as long as it removed copyrighted material when notified by the rights holder."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/24/technology/24google.html?scp=1&sq=copyright&st=cse
Copyright and Football: A Guest Post; New York Times, Freakonomics, 9/17/10
Kal Raustiala and Chris Sprigman, New York Times, Freakonomics; Copyright and Football: A Guest Post:
"Kal Raustiala, a professor at UCLA Law School and the UCLA International Institute, and Chris Sprigman, a professor at the University of Virginia Law School, are experts in counterfeiting and intellectual property. They have been guest-blogging for us about copyright issues. Today, they write about copyrighting and football."
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/17/copyrighting-football-a-guest-post/?scp=2&sq=copyright&st=cse
"Kal Raustiala, a professor at UCLA Law School and the UCLA International Institute, and Chris Sprigman, a professor at the University of Virginia Law School, are experts in counterfeiting and intellectual property. They have been guest-blogging for us about copyright issues. Today, they write about copyrighting and football."
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/17/copyrighting-football-a-guest-post/?scp=2&sq=copyright&st=cse
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Stevie Wonder to UN: Ease Copyrights for the Blind; ABC News via Associated Press, 9/20/10
Bradley S. Klapper, ABC News via Associated Press; Stevie Wonder to UN: Ease Copyrights for the Blind: Stevie Wonder urges UN diplomats to pass treaty helping the blind or face his musical wrath:
"Stevie Wonder pressed global copyright overseers on Monday to help blind and visually impaired people access millions of science, history and other audiobooks, which they cannot read in electronic form.
The blind singer told the U.N.'s 184-nation World Intellectual Property Organization that more than 300 million people who "live in the dark" want to "read their way into light," and the current copyright system denies them an equal opportunity...
But the problem of access for such copyrighted material goes to the heart of a growing crisis in the world of copyright protection, as the Internet increasingly muddies laws that were created for traditional media. Whereas wide exceptions exist for books in Braille, WIPO officials say there is confusion over how these benefits can be translated into the digital age."
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=11679443
"Stevie Wonder pressed global copyright overseers on Monday to help blind and visually impaired people access millions of science, history and other audiobooks, which they cannot read in electronic form.
The blind singer told the U.N.'s 184-nation World Intellectual Property Organization that more than 300 million people who "live in the dark" want to "read their way into light," and the current copyright system denies them an equal opportunity...
But the problem of access for such copyrighted material goes to the heart of a growing crisis in the world of copyright protection, as the Internet increasingly muddies laws that were created for traditional media. Whereas wide exceptions exist for books in Braille, WIPO officials say there is confusion over how these benefits can be translated into the digital age."
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=11679443
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Google's publishing free for all undermines our literary tradition; (London) Guardian, 9/19/10
Robert McCrum, (London) Guardian; Google's publishing free for all undermines our literary tradition: The 'dark threat of digitisation' is being underestimated, warns Robert McCrum, even by enlightened critics such as Andre Schiffrin:
"There's a lot that's passionate and useful in Schiffrin's anguished analysis. He is right to identify a healthy market as the key to a vital culture and vigorous democracy. His heart is certainly in the right place, but strangely, for a book entitled Words and Money, he never fully addresses the thorny question of "free", as articulated by Anderson, James Boyle (The Public Domain) and Lawrence Lessig (Free Culture). I wish he had because this goes to the heart of the crisis faced by print at the moment...
Johnson was right. Words that get written for money are likely to be superior to words spun out for nothing, on a whim. California's "free" movement wants to argue that literary copyright is an intolerable restriction of the public's right to access information, and that words should be free. That's a profound threat to the western intellectual tradition. I hope that André Schiffrin, having raised the alarm about the demise of serious publishing and journalism, will urgently turn his attention to the new, possibly darker, threat of digitisation and its consequences."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/sep/19/literature-google-publishing-threat-mccrum
"There's a lot that's passionate and useful in Schiffrin's anguished analysis. He is right to identify a healthy market as the key to a vital culture and vigorous democracy. His heart is certainly in the right place, but strangely, for a book entitled Words and Money, he never fully addresses the thorny question of "free", as articulated by Anderson, James Boyle (The Public Domain) and Lawrence Lessig (Free Culture). I wish he had because this goes to the heart of the crisis faced by print at the moment...
Johnson was right. Words that get written for money are likely to be superior to words spun out for nothing, on a whim. California's "free" movement wants to argue that literary copyright is an intolerable restriction of the public's right to access information, and that words should be free. That's a profound threat to the western intellectual tradition. I hope that André Schiffrin, having raised the alarm about the demise of serious publishing and journalism, will urgently turn his attention to the new, possibly darker, threat of digitisation and its consequences."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/sep/19/literature-google-publishing-threat-mccrum
Friday, September 17, 2010
Designers Get Fierce With Copyright On The Catwalk; NPR's Morning Edition, 9/16/10
Kaomi Goetz, NPR's Morning Edition; Designers Get Fierce With Copyright On The Catwalk:
"The Innovative Design Protection and Piracy Prevention Act, introduced in August by New York Sen. Charles Schumer and now pending in Congress, would be the first piece of legislation to provide copyright protection — for three years in this case — to new and inventive designs. It's not much compared with the 25 years of protection European laws provide, but it's a start...
That's because the U.S. is one of a few countries that don't have copyright protection for fashion, which American courts have long viewed as utilitarian — a craft rather than an art — and therefore haven’t protected in the same way as other creative fields like film or music."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129834984
"The Innovative Design Protection and Piracy Prevention Act, introduced in August by New York Sen. Charles Schumer and now pending in Congress, would be the first piece of legislation to provide copyright protection — for three years in this case — to new and inventive designs. It's not much compared with the 25 years of protection European laws provide, but it's a start...
That's because the U.S. is one of a few countries that don't have copyright protection for fashion, which American courts have long viewed as utilitarian — a craft rather than an art — and therefore haven’t protected in the same way as other creative fields like film or music."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129834984
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)